Banned in Canada
"Money for Nothing."
The reason
The word used is derogatory in this context. (It's amazing how much of the language around the gay community expropriates formerly common words for a different use.) However, it seems to me that this is precisely the kind of tone-deafness that afflicts our present discussions around Huck Finn. If you bother to listen to the song, you will hear, probably instantly, that Dire Straits isn't particularly fond of the character speaking. They are holding him up as an example of what not to be, not to do, not to think. It is satire and it is true to life recording the way some people think. It was not meant to be an insult to the gay community and says almost nothing about the gay community, because the epithet is thrown at anyone who is marginally different--wearing an earring, etc. This man has no notion of who is or isn't gay, but anyone who isn't like him is probably gay and beneath contempt. But someone decides the word itself is enough to ban the song. So much for free speech. Who knows what be next on the great offense list--requiring handling. I know that the other day I was eating a package of skittles and I poured them all out and separated them and discovered that there were three fewer green than the next least common. Green is my favorite color and I was profoundly offended, shocked, and disturbed that I should have been slighted on my green skittles--perhaps legal action is required. Oh, and the other day, someone called me Steve rather than Steven--I'm sure that is actionable. Oh, and I should note that I took out tons of potential offensive language in many of my posts. I've determined never to include the word white in any context lest I offend again non-whiteness.
The truth of the matter is that individuals of any stripe can be offended by almost anything. And if we have a law to enforce the whims of the least humorous and most literal amongst us, we will be losing all of our freedom. It is a death by small cuts and what seems innocuous now, will not seem so when more stringent measures are enforced on a daily basis. One needn't panic, but it's good to have watchdogs on the potential slippery slope. Think about the famous aphorism re: the holocaust.
It's amusing on a small scale, but frightening as one considers the escalation path.
Oh, I often chuckle when people tell me that Brave New World is truer to life that 1984. If this isn't the first step toward the memory hole, then it would difficult to see a more suitable portent. Canada has apparently decided to abandon the principle of free speech and it is a shame to see that.
The reason
The word used is derogatory in this context. (It's amazing how much of the language around the gay community expropriates formerly common words for a different use.) However, it seems to me that this is precisely the kind of tone-deafness that afflicts our present discussions around Huck Finn. If you bother to listen to the song, you will hear, probably instantly, that Dire Straits isn't particularly fond of the character speaking. They are holding him up as an example of what not to be, not to do, not to think. It is satire and it is true to life recording the way some people think. It was not meant to be an insult to the gay community and says almost nothing about the gay community, because the epithet is thrown at anyone who is marginally different--wearing an earring, etc. This man has no notion of who is or isn't gay, but anyone who isn't like him is probably gay and beneath contempt. But someone decides the word itself is enough to ban the song. So much for free speech. Who knows what be next on the great offense list--requiring handling. I know that the other day I was eating a package of skittles and I poured them all out and separated them and discovered that there were three fewer green than the next least common. Green is my favorite color and I was profoundly offended, shocked, and disturbed that I should have been slighted on my green skittles--perhaps legal action is required. Oh, and the other day, someone called me Steve rather than Steven--I'm sure that is actionable. Oh, and I should note that I took out tons of potential offensive language in many of my posts. I've determined never to include the word white in any context lest I offend again non-whiteness.
The truth of the matter is that individuals of any stripe can be offended by almost anything. And if we have a law to enforce the whims of the least humorous and most literal amongst us, we will be losing all of our freedom. It is a death by small cuts and what seems innocuous now, will not seem so when more stringent measures are enforced on a daily basis. One needn't panic, but it's good to have watchdogs on the potential slippery slope. Think about the famous aphorism re: the holocaust.
It's amusing on a small scale, but frightening as one considers the escalation path.
Oh, I often chuckle when people tell me that Brave New World is truer to life that 1984. If this isn't the first step toward the memory hole, then it would difficult to see a more suitable portent. Canada has apparently decided to abandon the principle of free speech and it is a shame to see that.
Comments
Post a Comment