It's all about context, if there is no genuine malicious or nasty intent behind the word then I personally don't have a problem with it. I think too often these days people are very quick to be offended or be offended on someone else's behalf, I don't like that.

Except it's not as clear cut as that. This is a word used to target and humiliate gay people, and if you've paid any attention to people's recounts in this topic, it CAN be damaging. I see no harm in taking a community view here - if one person is offended by the word, we all should be, it's a word that is nothing more than homophobic. It's nothing to do with being quick to be offended, it's about waking up and smelling the coffee.

It's all about context, if there is no genuine malicious or nasty intent behind the word then I personally don't have a problem with it. I think too often these days people are very quick to be offended or be offended on someone else's behalf, I don't like that.

 

It's not for you, me, or anyone to police how people feel when they hear a word that is often used as a slur.

 

I get that both words have different histories and the N word holds a lot of weight to it, but for the sake of this argument I think it’s an okay comparison as they’re both swear words used to target minorities.

 

Funnily enough a little while ago today a friend saw some debates about this and asked me if it was censored on radio because he thought it was and this was his response:

I think it’s a good example of how harmful it can be.

 

This post is proof of that.

I find it amazing that this exact debate is had every single year and nothing ever changes :P

 

When they played the version without f*****, did they censor out just that word or the entire line/verse? We've started playing Christmas music on the radio at work and the entire second verse is completely skipped because of it. I'd be fine with or without that word as it personally doesn't bother me (I do see why it would bother others though rightfully) but the song gets butchered to the point it's barely worth playing at all

 

And this really is the crux of it. People are not asking for the song to be banned, just that word to be bleeped out when it’s played on daytime radio. The resistance to it is frankly baffling. It’s going to have zero impact to anybody’s life if the word is bleeped out. And as demonstrated multiple times in this thread, the word is incredibly loaded and triggering for many (and no, not all) gay people. I just don’t understand why not having an offensive word in a song seems to cause such an uproar, when literally every other song would be subject to different rules. What is it about this particular word and song that people cling onto that makes them think they can shout “f*****” every Christmas without any comeback? This thread has not been enlightening.

The worst part of this thread is comments like "people are to easily offendended these days" or "people getting offended on people's people". When a word has caused upset to a community for decades and still does offend people they are of course going to debate whethor or not it shoud be censored in music, in this example, the pogues song.

Except it's not as clear cut as that. This is a word used to target and humiliate gay people, and if you've paid any attention to people's recounts in this topic, it CAN be damaging. I see no harm in taking a community view here - if one person is offended by the word, we all should be, it's a word that is nothing more than homophobic. It's nothing to do with being quick to be offended, it's about waking up and smelling the coffee.

 

There are many words used to target and humiliate gay people, are we going to censor them all. And there will probably be new insults created used towards gay people, unfortunately that is human nature.

Censoring words isn't the way, instead everyone should be educated when it's appropriate to use certain words, most of the time it's really common sense.

There are many words used to target and humiliate gay people, are we going to censor them all. And there will probably be new insults created used towards gay people, unfortunately that is human nature.

Censoring words isn't the way, instead everyone should be educated when it's appropriate to use certain words, most of the time it's really common sense.

Yes, we should censor them all because discriminating against gay people is highly unacceptable. It's NEVER appropriate to use any slur like that, so censoring is the only option. Once again, read about the negative impacts the word has had on people from this very forum over the years.

There are many words used to target and humiliate gay people, are we going to censor them all. And there will probably be new insults created used towards gay people, unfortunately that is human nature.

Censoring words isn't the way, instead everyone should be educated when it's appropriate to use certain words, most of the time it's really common sense.

 

And the way not to educate people is to have the word “f*****” being played on Radio 1 at 1pm on a Tuesday as if it’s the most normal thing in the world. I would argue that radio censoring the word “f*****” is part of educating people that it’s offensive instead of leaving it in and by doing so normalising it.

There are many words used to target and humiliate gay people, are we going to censor them all. And there will probably be new insults created used towards gay people, unfortunately that is human nature.

Censoring words isn't the way, instead everyone should be educated when it's appropriate to use certain words, most of the time it's really common sense.

If it limits the usage of the slur words to LGBT people then yes I'd censor them all. If it even stops 1 young kid from hearing and learning those kind of words and using them against the community then it does it's purpose.

Yes, we should censor them all because discriminating against gay people is highly unacceptable. It's NEVER appropriate to use any slur like that, so censoring is the only option. Once again, read about the negative impacts the word has had on people from this very forum over the years.

 

Banning words isn't going to solve discrimination towards gay people.

 

Banning words isn't going to solve discrimination towards gay people.

No, but it's a step in the right direction. Like Iain said, it sends out the right message that using those words is wrong and unacceptable. Just because it's not a massive final solution, doesn't mean it's not worth working to improve.

Banning words isn't going to solve discrimination towards gay people.

1. Its not banning the word its censoring it just like any other cuss word in songs. 2. No it isn't going to solve discrimination for gay people but it would be a start for fairer treatment if slurs against us weren't played on national radio as if its a normal thing to hear.

I've not commented on this thread until now, but I have been reading it from the beginning and, in that time, I'm happy to say my opinion on the matter in hand has changed.

 

I never had an issue with f-word being used in this song. The meaning of the word was different to how it's interpreted now and the song itself was just a fun, harmless, sing-along song. The reasons that have been put forward in this thread have helped me change my view though, from the objective reasoning of the fact any other similar word, regardless of context and date, would be at least censored from radio, to the personal responses of why hearing this word can cause offence or be triggering. I guess I'm lucky that I've never been subject to this, but reading about people who have experienced others think they're clever by aiming this word at them and think they get a free pass to say it is just awful and I understand the fear and harm it can cause.

 

People are always going to have different opinions on this matter, but surely everyone has the decency to acknowledge and respect others when they share just how hurtful hearing such a word is to them. I wasn't going to say anything in this thread, but I think it's important that those who took the time to put forward insightful, fair and elegantly written posts that explained why the use of the F-word in this song is inappropriate know that their words haven't gone unnoticed. You've educated me and I'm sure there's many others who have been too, so don't think that, just because those claiming you are wrong to be offended are shouting the loudest, others aren't coming away from this with a new perspective.

The most hilarious thing about the whole "snowflakes, everyone is so easily offended!1!1" thing is how the people spouting that crap every time are the ones getting so wound up. If it's "just a word" or "not worth getting offended about", why do you feel the need to insult and belittle over it?! It is never for you, whether you are gay or straight, to dictate what experiences might render something as offensive. If you lack that basic empathy to see that perhaps a slur might trigger god knows what for somebody, having had it shouted at them all their lives, then I'm sorry for you to be honest.

 

It absolutely baffles me that it's always "just a joke" or "just a word" until it doesn't go the way of the (usually) straight, white, male majority and then it's "SNOWFLAKES!1!!" :rolleyes:

No, but it's a step in the right direction. Like Iain said, it sends out the right message that using those words is wrong and unacceptable. Just because it's not a massive final solution, doesn't mean it's not worth working to improve.

 

I hear what you are saying, I just think it's a fine balance between freedom of speech and censorship. But if people really do feel hearing that word in FONY gives them license to discriminate towards gay people then of course I think it should be censored.

I hear what you are saying, I just think it's a fine balance between freedom of speech and censorship. But if people really do feel hearing that word in FONY gives them license to discriminate towards gay people then of course I think it should be censored.

 

There is no attack on free speech when people want a derogative and homophobic slur censored on the radio. The context is irrelevant.

 

 

Some people are struggling with the concept of empathy and are unable to understand beyond their own experiences.

 

So, to be as basic as possible:

 

Bitch, bast*rd, various swear words, the n-word, drug references etc - all censored on the radio. They are bleeped or edited out during the day. This is a similar word and should be treated similarly. It's really simple.

 

 

 

 

 

People saying the muting the word is going to stop people hearing it (including kids) but are they not likely to then ask why it's bleeped and when they find out what the word is think it's naighty and go on to use it??

 

For the record, I think straight white males seem to get a lot of abuse these days and most things are blamed on them....so easy to attack. I'm not white by the way before someone jumps on me.

People saying the muting the word is going to stop people hearing it (including kids) but are they not likely to then ask why it's bleeped and when they find out what the word is think it's naighty and go on to use it??

 

Yes, but bleeping it out sets an example that it is in fact a slur and not really the best word to use, the same...with...every...other...censored..word.

People saying the muting the word is going to stop people hearing it (including kids) but are they not likely to then ask why it's bleeped and when they find out what the word is think it's naighty and go on to use it??

 

For the record, I think straight white males seem to get a lot of abuse these days and most things are blamed on them....so easy to attack. I'm not white by the way before someone jumps on me.

Poor oppressed straight, white men who have never had to fight for rights or face discrimination based on sexuality, race or gender.... this is the sorta sentiment that leads to a suggestion for straight pride.

 

Asking why it is bleeped opens a conversation for parents to explain to kids why it is wrong. It's how I learnt about swear words in music! My parents told me that shit, f***, etc were rude when they popped up in songs and I was told not to say them as a kid. Simple.

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."

 

I didn't have much of an opinion, but now that I have seen this post and a couple like it, such as that watsapp conversation, I have to agree with the majority. It should be censored. I never knew it meant lazy in Ireland in the past, and I can guarantee the people pointing and laughing as they sing it have no idea either.