I am not a Christian but the banning of Jesus of Nazareth, nativity scenes and advent calendars showing Mary and Joseph and the three wise men, by the British Red Cross over Christmas is political correctness gone mad.

Red Cross chief executive Sir Nicholas Young insisted it was vital the organisation was seen as neutral, and is quoted as saying: “Neutrality is as important on the high street as it is in Iraq.” This particular Nick is certainly no relative of his namesake saint.

My contemptuous views on the politically correct are fairly well known on this Forum, but for Christ’s sake (pun intended), even if Christmas is now, mainly a commercial enterprise, this ban is akin to not recognising a corpse at its wake or banning Mohammed from Mecca.

Christmas, at its root, IS the celebration of the birth of Jesus and has nothing to do with any other faith.

Humbug!

I am a Christian, but even if I wasnt, I would think this was ridiculous.

Either they celebrate Christmas in their shops or they dont celebrate it. You cant have these half measures, pretend to celebrate it but not really.

This is what I found on Ananova

A spokesman for the Red Cross said: "We don't want any overt religious symbols as we have to be seen as neutral if we are to work effectively. We can't be seen to be affiliated with any religion as we want to be open to anyone of any religion or no religion. We are not a Christian organisation, we are a neutral organisation."

Do you think it is as a result of them being bombed in Iraq?

I donated money to the Red Cross every month by direct debit for many years but cancelled it last year after a similar story.

What if the alternative is to be targetted by religious fundamentalists? I don't call this political correctness, I call this self preservation. They've got my money now that they are no longer publicly associated with one faith to the exclusion of others.

PS Christmas isn't about christ, never has been. It was highjacked by the christians from another festival, MoonMaiden has written about this previously.

Originally posted by max
What if the alternative is to be targetted by religious fundamentalists? I don't call this political correctness, I call this self preservation. They've got my money now that they are no longer publicly associated with one faith to the exclusion of others.

PS Christmas isn't about christ, never has been. It was highjacked by the christians from another festival, MoonMaiden has written about this previously.
Have they really got your money now or are you just saying that to try and make a point? To counter the loss of my money your direct debit needs to be for £10 per month. You can set up your DD (if you haven't already done so) here. (https://www.redcross.org.uk/DDDonationDetails.asp?id=3487&cachefixer=cf12419646869618)

Strange that this "policy" only seems to apply to the British Red Cross. To truly show religious nutrality, and thus protect them from attack by religious fundamentalists, shouldn't the policy apply to the organisation worldwide? Seems the Australian Red Cross for one have no problem celebrating and marketing Christmas...

Australian Red Cross - Xmas Cards (http://au.store.yahoo.com/redcrossnsw/8500.html)

Originally posted by max
What if the alternative is to be targetted by religious fundamentalists? I don't call this political correctness, I call this self preservation. They've got my money now that they are no longer publicly associated with one faith to the exclusion of others.

PS Christmas isn't about christ, never has been. It was highjacked by the christians from another festival, MoonMaiden has written about this previously.

It’s common knowledge that the Church of Rome appropriated and absorbed the customs and traditions of other previous faiths and movements in their efforts to increase the number of people under their control. But that is the history of all the major faiths. It has NOTHING to do with what Christmas means and stands for – read almost any dictionary or lexicon.

The word itself means Christ mass – a celebration of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. In 350 AD the Bishop of Rome, Julius I, choose December 25th as the observance of Christmas, although, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (the definitive 11th edition) there were earlier observances of that date to celebrate Jesus’ birth.

MSN Encarta describes it as: Christmas, annual Christian holiday commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ…

So to state that: ‘Christmas isn't about christ, never has been.’ Is just pure crass idiocy.

Ok, you're right, I did fly off the handle a little with my post about christmas. It was merely in response to yet another of your accusations of political correctness being to blame for something with which you disagree.

I respect organisations like the Red Cross too much to criticise them when they respond to atrocities like the bombing in Iraq in a way designed to protect their employees and recipients of their aid.

The Red Cross did something similar last year, didn't they?

BBC website, Saturday, 21 December, 2002
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2596703.stm

"...chief executive Sir Nicholas Young said on Saturday it had always been the organisation's policy not to display materials of an "overtly religious nature" in shop windows.

He said the organisation had never been associated with any religion in accordance with its principles of impartiality and neutrality. "

...

Labour peer Lord Ahmed, one of the country's most prominent Muslim politicians, told the Daily Mail newspaper it was "stupid" to think Muslims would be offended.

He added: "The Muslim community has been talking to Christians for the past 1,400 years.

Oh yes, and it's Christmas, not Xmas, you godless heathens ;)

Perhaps the Red Cross should look carefully at their use of a cross as their logo, I wonder if it has any religious implications? Whether or not its origin is in the Christian cross in the eyes of some of the public there will be a connection. What about the similar use of the "Red Crescent" - isn't that an Islamic symbol.
Do the red cross go through donations to their charity shops to ensure no religious books or symbols get taken into stock? If I send them a gold crucifix will they reject it? Given that they are sufficiently cynical to make money from selling Red Cross christmas cards http://www.charitygifts.com/html/redcross.htm I guess not.
Whether we are christians or not I think the majority of us take no issue with the christian values and largely behave in accordance with them - thou shalt not steal etc. In fact to call that a christian value might imply that it is not a value of other faiths whereas the ethical underpinnings of most faiths have an awful lot in common, they are merely expressed differently. I have several Muslim and Hindu friends who join in with Christmas, kids in the nativity play etc. they respect the christian faith and just ask for that respect to be reciprocated.

There is nothing wrong or offensive about showing respect for the beliefs of others but obstructing their recognition is itself offensive. The Red Cross is mistaken in taking this negative attitude a more rational approach would be to be positive about the ethical foundations of most religions and encourage their charity shops to reflect the traditions of other religions at the appropriate times of year where relevant to the local community. In any case these days Christmas celebrations in this country have more to do with food, drink, predictable movies on TV and parties than with its historical origins in christianity - which in any case merely hijacked pre-christian winter solstice celebrations.

The Red Cross were also responsible for the Sangat camp which served no purpose other than as a staging post for illegal entry to UK. They no longer get any donations from me.

Last year in a story strangely headed "Red Cross denies banning Christmas" the BBC produced this quote:
Confirming the ban at the charity's 430 shops, chief executive Sir Nicholas Young said: "It has always been a policy at the British Red Cross not to display materials of an overtly religious nature in shop windows or elsewhere.

Quote: ‘He said the organisation had NEVER been associated with any religion in accordance with its principles of impartiality and neutrality.’ (my emphasis)

Then Sir Nick doesn’t know its history – the symbol of the Red Cross is a reverse Swiss flag, and the Swiss flag’s origins were deeply rooted in Christendom. Thus, there is an association.

See:

http://www.eda.admin.ch/washington_emb/e/home/geninf/flag.html

Originally posted by robh
Perhaps the Red Cross should look carefully at their use of a cross as their logo, I wonder if it has any religious implications? Whether or not its origin is in the Christian cross in the eyes of some of the public there will be a connection.

The red cross emblem (red cross - white background) is simply the inverse of Switzerland's flag (White Cross - Red background).

Nomme

I think what I object to is the idea that they will sell Christmas cards and gifts, but they will have pics of jolly snowmen on, rather than the Christ child, because they dont want to be overtly religious.

I am deeply insulted and offended by deliberately taking the birth of Christ out of Christmas.

Surely the simplest way to avoid being overtly religious is not to sell greetings cards at all, or put up tinsel, or any of it, ignore the whole thing or engage with it properly, not this fudge.

Fortunately I give my money to Shelter and the Salvation Army and they dont play these silly games, least I hope they dont.

Originally posted by Carlwarker
Christmas, at its root, IS the celebration of the birth of Jesus and has nothing to do with any other faith.

Humbug!
******!

Christmas being based around Christ maybe, but the time of year it SHOULD be celebrated is mid summer.

Christians changed it to December to basically highjack the pagan/wiccan faith celebration of Yule! Which is and has always been where we now celebrate christmas!

Although I do agree that the Red Cross banning these symbolic images at 'Christmas/Yule' time is ridiculous.


Swearing removed

Surely the fact that it's called Christmas reflects the fact that it's a Christian ceremony. Next they'll be changing the name of it.

Originally posted by DaBouncer
*****!

Christmas being based around Christ maybe, but the time of year it SHOULD be celebrated is mid summer.

Christians changed it to December to basically highjack the pagan/wiccan faith celebration of Yule! Which is and has always been where we now celebrate christmas! ...


In spite of your rather crude reply, I repeat what I stated, that Christmas, at its root, IS the celebration of the birth of Jesus and has nothing to do with any other faith. The word itself means a mass celebrating the birth of Christ.

So if you can't get that into your head, please keep trying.

And, please see my previous post on the appropriation of already existing festivals at this time of the year by the Roman Church.

As for the time of the Nativity – that is still argued about by religious academics.

Oh no I agreed that the word Christmas is in celebration of Christ.

However, the fact remaining that Church decided to celebrate it at the time they do, for the single purpose of eradicating another faith. Well that kinda destroys what christmas is about a little. So I can get it into my head, as yes I DO understand but I'm not too blind to see that it a little tainted in it's spritual meaning somewhat. If YOU can get that into your head... just keep trying!

But with regards to your comments on Political Correctness gone mad well I have already made my feelings clear on that one above ^^!

It's funny that the PC brigade do anything they can to avoid 'offending' other religions, yet don't seem to mind offending Christians, which is the worlds biggest religion.

there was a article in the paper yesterday about a woman who put an advert seeking a single white male for a relationship and for her pains had a visit from the race relations board for her troubles stating that the advert was racist is this what its coming to :confused:

Hi,

I heard this on the radio and from the POV of being a heathen I find it quite nice that people don't want to offend us.

Christmas *is* the celebration of christs birth - albeit they decided to have the festival a) not on the date of christs birth and b) adopted a roman pagan date of Satunalia aswell as it being remarkably close to the winter solstice and also the heathen celebration of Yule - which incidentatily give us many 'christmas' traditions which are in fact more pagan than they are christian.
In this I think it is rightful to say that the Christians highjacked a festival native to the British Isles in order to convert us all easier.

However one of the main points of the heathen and pagan faiths is being tolerant towards other people and their faiths - which means I will not be ramming down my kids throats the pagan calendar and refusing to let my son join in with the nativity play.

I was brought up with the constant battering of the nativity through school. It got boring, very boring. I have no problem with seeing the nativity anywhere, I think some of the scenes are quite beautiful, but it would be nice to see more recognition of pagan faiths around Yule rather than just abolishing all traces of religious belief during the winter period

Perhaps it may be nice if folk of different faiths on the forum here talked about what their winter festivals mean. I know we have christians and of course pagans, What about the Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Bhuddist communities? What do they do if they do anything?

Moon Maiden

Red Cross Has NOT Banned Christmas (http://www.redcross.org.uk/news_release.asp?id=4139)

Actually this is quite a wonderful statement if you ask me. The red Cross do work across the world helping people of all faiths - not wanting to be associated with one faith in particular I find admirable.

Moon

Political Correctness?

Hardly.

Tell me that Christmas Cards are actually a vital component of celebrating the Birth of Christ, instead of a social habit invented in the Victorian era so people could show off how many friends they had.

Instead of microscopically examining the Red Cross Christmas Card output and cancelling your donation because of a lack graven images of your prophet, imagine life for Red Cross doctors and Nurses in the war zones and disaster spots over the world. Then tell yourself again that what they put on their Christmas Cards is actually the least bit important.

They certainly don't care, they just want your money so they can use it for something more useful than power rangers or a footspa.

To stop your money because of what they put on their Christmas cards seems churlish to me.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Political Correctness?

Hardly.

Tell me that Christmas Cards are actually a vital component of celebrating the Birth of Christ, instead of a social habit invented in the Victorian era so people could show off how many friends they had.

Instead of microscopically examining the Red Cross Christmas Card output and cancelling your donation because of a lack graven images of your prophet, imagine life for Red Cross doctors and Nurses in the war zones and disaster spots over the world. Then tell yourself again that what they put on their Christmas Cards is actually the least bit important.

They certainly don't care, they just want your money so they can use it for something more useful than power rangers or a footspa.

To stop your money because of what they put on their Christmas cards seems churlish to me.
I am not a Christian so my reasons for cancelling my donations have nothing to do with a lack of biblical images on Christmas cards.

Some people celebrate Christmas because it forms part of their religious beliefs. Some, like myself, celebrate it because it's a cultural custom/tradition of this country. The British Red Cross do not issue a policy to staff forbidding them from openly celebrating Diwali or Ramadan so why pick on a "Christian" festival? This policy is plainly discriminatory because it seeks to deny just one group (those that celebrate Christmas) the right to practice their beliefs.

The main speakers at a recent international conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief stressed the importance of respecting religious freedom while fighting terrorism.

“The threat of terrorism must not be used as an excuse to infringe on the right of individuals and groups to freely choose and manifest their religion or belief. We should not use excuses to limit these freedoms,” commented Ambassador Christian Strohal, recently installed as director of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the organizers of the conference. source (http://www.adventist.org/news/data/2003/06/1058899269/index.html.en)

Phan, it is funny how you can so easily overlook discriminatory practices provided it is against British beliefs or customs. If an English Directory Enquiry Service based in Indian told their staff they couldn't openly celebrate Diwali by lighting candles or lamps would you dismiss this too as "not the least bit important"? Would you try and justify it by mockingly suggesting it's a churlish fuss about string and wax? I think not.

Originally posted by Zamo
I am not a Christian so my reasons for cancelling my donations have nothing to do with a lack of biblical images on Christmas cards.

Cool, nor am I.

<snip>The British Red Cross do not issue a policy to staff forbidding them from openly celebrating Diwali or Ramadan so why pick on a "Christian" festival?
Actually they seem to try and avoid display(ing)materials of an overtly religious nature in shop windows or elsewhere - just that Christian imagery is predominant in our country, but not exclusively.

This policy is plainly discriminatory because it seeks to deny just one group (those that celebrate Christmas) the right to practice their beliefs.
Not according to the Red Cross. No one is denied practice of their beliefs. But the shops are kept free of overtly religious material.

The main speakers at a recent international conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief stressed the importance of respecting religious freedom while fighting terrorism.

“The threat of terrorism must not be used as an excuse to infringe on the right of individuals and groups to freely choose and manifest their religion or belief. <snip>

They are not using terrorism 'as an excuse to ban Christmas'
Nicolas Young CEO for the Red Cross
... it is essential that we are not seen to be linked with any political groups, religious organisations, or particular communities.
It is vital that we continue to do so, wherever, and whenever we can. It may sound dramatic, but lives really do depend on it.

[i]originally posted by Zamo[i]
Phan, it is funny how you can so easily overlook discriminatory practices provided it is against British beliefs or customs. If an English Directory Enquiry Service based in Indian told their staff they couldn't openly celebrate Diwali by lighting candles or lamps would you dismiss this too as "not the least bit important"? Would you try and justify it by mockingly suggesting it's a churlish fuss about string and wax? I think not.
As far as I can see this is not a discriminatory practice against Christians? A more detailed explanation of how it is discriminatory against only Christians when actually the 'directive' simply says "overtly religious nature" woould be helpful.

Your comparison/hypothetical problem is very confusing....

The chief differences between a UK Directory Enquiries office in Mumbai and The Red Cross are pretty self evident and no need to go into them here.

Lamps and Candles are not overtly religious symbols. Christians use them to, as do pagans etc.

Red Cross are not being instructed from abroad as Indian Directory Enquiries are in your hypothetical example.

You have withdrawn a lifesaving donation because the CEO has asked Charity Shop workers to avoid overtly religious material in their shops, it seems to me.

All this talk of 'banning christmas' appears to be tabloid inflation, unless someone can find me the Memo from Head office to all Red Cross Charity shops saying "Christmas is Banned until further notice - Idolaters will be executed, those who attend church will be sacked, no prayers to be said before during or after work" or somesuch. That would count as denying people the right to exercise their Christian Beliefs.

[edited the quotes - why can't we nest quotes? silly BBS]

Originally posted by panda79
there was a article in the paper yesterday about a woman who put an advert seeking a single white male for a relationship and for her pains had a visit from the race relations board for her troubles stating that the advert was racist is this what its coming to :confused:

No, that isnt what the world is coming to, that is what the BNP propoganda machine is coming to

"Dont believe what you read" to quote a punk 70s song

The Red Cross is an international aid organisation based in the (largely-christian) West, which is currently operating in the (largely-Islamic) middle-east. Tensions are already running high; the Red Cross are merely doing the expedient thing with the situation in Iraq and beyond the way it is.

Nuff said.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Lamps and Candles are not overtly religious symbols. Christians use them to, as do pagans etc.
... and nor, I'd have thought, were Christmas (fir) trees but it was widely reported that BRC shop managers were told not to put them up.



Originally posted by Phanerothyme
You have withdrawn a lifesaving donation because the CEO has asked Charity Shop workers to avoid overtly religious material in their shops, it seems to me.[/B]
No, all I have done is stop giving money to the Red Cross to spend. That doesn't mean someone else doesn't get my money for "lifesaving" work.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
All this talk of 'banning christmas' appears to be tabloid inflation, unless someone can find me the Memo from Head office to all Red Cross Charity shops saying "Christmas is Banned until further notice. [/B]
I'll notify the papers that in future they must not report anything until all evidence has been before you and stamped "authorised to be publicised and discussed".

Originally posted by Zamo

The main speakers at a recent international conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief stressed the importance of respecting religious freedom while fighting terrorism.

“The threat of terrorism must not be used as an excuse to infringe on the right of individuals and groups to freely choose and manifest their religion or belief. We should not use excuses to limit these freedoms,” commented Ambassador Christian Strohal, recently installed as director of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the organizers of the conference. source [/B]
Originally posted by Phanerothyme
They are not using terrorism 'as an excuse to ban Christmas'. [/B]
So why are they? Are you really telling me that having a Chrismas tree and decorations in a BRC shop in Britain (a country where most people celebrate Christmas) really undermines their ability to operate in a neutral capacity in war zones? I don't believe this and nor do many others, which is why it gets press coverage and is label as "political correctness gone mad".

Originally posted by Jack Yerbody
The Red Cross is an international aid organisation based in the (largely-christian) West, which is currently operating in the (largely-Islamic) middle-east. Tensions are already running high; the Red Cross are merely doing the expedient thing with the situation in Iraq and beyond the way it is.

Nuff said.
So the recent attack on the Red Cross in Iraq was an Islamic Fundamentalist response to a Christmaas tree being displayed in a charity shop on Ecclesall Road? That's a nonsense.

Nuff said.

Originally posted by panda79
there was a article in the paper yesterday about a woman who put an advert seeking a single white male for a relationship and for her pains had a visit from the race relations board for her troubles stating that the advert was racist is this what its coming to :confused:

Yet it is OK for blacks to do the same.

Originally posted by t020
Yet it is OK for blacks to do the same.
What on earth are you talking about? Yet again you put some rubbish up without any supporting evidence.

Originally posted by max
What on earth are you talking about? Yet again you put some rubbish up without any supporting evidence.

Well I could prove it by going through the personal ads and showing examples, but I'd rather go on hearsay with this one and if you need proof, search online personal ads or something.

Also, as seen in the "Robberies in Hunters Bar" thread, among other, I'm the one supporting FACTS with EVIDENCE, not spouting libellous garbage (Mike).

Libellous !!

Ha ha! Get a life!

Originally posted by t020
Well I could prove it by going through the personal ads and showing examples, but I'd rather go on hearsay with this one and if you need proof, search online personal ads or something.

Also, as seen in the "Robberies in Hunters Bar" thread, among other, I'm the one supporting FACTS with EVIDENCE, not spouting libellous garbage (Mike).
The only evidence you have EVER presented is related to your paranoia about Ecclesall. The rest of your outpourings are just Daily Mail based tosh.

Originally posted by max
The only evidence you have EVER presented is related to your paranoia about Ecclesall. The rest of your outpourings are just Daily Mail based tosh.


Well, they're not, but if they were how would it be inferior to Guardian based tosh? Both have political agendas so present biased reports and articles. Ones for the loony left, the others for the far right. So what?

With all the SF talk of political correctness I was interested to hear of political correctness stories and the facts behind them. Does anyone have any?

in SA my dad was one of the bosses, one day a basotho guy was complaining that one of the white guys were being racist, when confronted the white guy said that the black guy was being racist. no one new the truth, so my dad fired them both. he had had a bad day.

Originally posted by thenewborn
in SA my dad was one of the bosses, one day a basotho guy was complaining that one of the white guys were being racist, when confronted the white guy said that the black guy was being racist. no one new the truth, so my dad fired them both. he had had a bad day.

Your dad sounds like he has a heart of gold.

No prizes for guessing which of the workers had the best pension plan, superannuation, unemployment benefit though. Especially if all this happened before the end of Apartheid.

after, and there really isnt such thing as pension plan in lesotho

For whites or blacks?

both, life is cheap, they don't really think about "little" things like that

Political correctness strikes again. Desperate Dan the cartoon cowboy strongman who has appeared in the pages of The Dandy for over 50 years, will no longer be drawn with his gun and spurs. He lost his dustbin "pipe" some time ago, but mercifully can still enjoy his favourite dish of cow pie - for now.

I read about this a wee while back and it's really sad.

I'd not put any faith on Cow Pie remaining - the vegetarian lobby and the animal rights people will soon have him eating Tofu pie. Does he still have the ability to strike matches on his stubble, or will he also soon be exfoliated and have his skin softened?

:)

I wonder if he still shaves with a blowlamp, or has that been banned too in case the kids copy him?

What's politically correct about it?

It sounds like nothing more than a publisher keeping his characters up to date to appeal to a modern audience.

Originally posted by Tony
What's politically correct about it?

It sounds like nothing more than a publisher keeping his characters up to date to appeal to a modern audience.

Well, he is dressed as a cowboy, so you'd expect him to have a gun and (possibly) spurs

I'd forgotten about the shaving......they'll get to work on that soon!

And as for keeping up with the times...God forbid....a Burberry wearing, lager drinking, dope smoking DD?

With tattoos (sp) a la Becks?

Eeeek!

The one that sticks in my memory is the one where, having tried several methods to cut his toenails, including a diamond tipped drill, he resorted to chewing them off. No doubt that would be considered too gross by today's readers.

As to the gun thing, I agree that it's just moving with the times. The only people to sport guns openly, apart from the police, etc., seem to be right wing gun-nuts in the good ol' US of A. Oh, and terrorists of all hues.

Originally posted by max
The one that sticks in my memory is the one where, having tried several methods to cut his toenails, including a diamond tipped drill, he resorted to chewing them off. No doubt that would be considered too gross by today's readers.

As to the gun thing, I agree that it's just moving with the times. The only people to sport guns openly, apart from the police, etc., seem to be right wing gun-nuts in the good ol' US of A. Oh, and terrorists of all hues.

But that was the thing about Dan, he seemed to exist in a land that was permanently frozen in the 50s. He dressed, talked and behaved like a cowboy, yet lived in a normal terraced house in a regular suburb. Then suddenly, the sheriff would appear on horseback. It was totally surreal.

That being so, I can't see how getting rid of Dan's gun and spurs would bring him "up to date".

Why get rid of the spurs? Have the RSPCA been on the phone to D.C.Thompson (Dandy publishers)? Dan can't find a horse strong enough to support him, anyway, so the spurs were purely cosmetic.

World gone mad?

He's a cowboy, cowboys carried guns.

What next? History lessons in school about the Battle of Hastings with the battle bit missing?:loopy:

Originally posted by markham
World gone mad?

He's a cowboy, cowboys carried guns.

What next? History lessons in school about the Battle of Hastings with the battle bit missing?:loopy:

Well, if that history lesson was real, comboy's didn't carry guns very often at all, and were often made up of minorities, particulary black and asian imigrants. So Desperate Dan is hardly a good example of us keeping history correct. Comboy's were the bottom of the social ladder and not feared but looked down on. Hollywood did a great job at re-writing history, why shouldn't we do it again now?

Originally posted by Snook
Well, if that history lesson was real, comboy's didn't carry guns very often at all, and were often made up of minorities, particulary black and asian imigrants. So Desperate Dan is hardly a good example of us keeping history correct. Comboy's were the bottom of the social ladder and not feared but looked down on. Hollywood did a great job at re-writing history, why shouldn't we do it again now?

Let's not get too intellectual about it. He was/is a CARTOON cowboy created in the 1930s and there lies much of his charm. He's a stereotype, as all cartoon characters must be in order to get the point across. He's not supposed to "keep history correct".

The stereotype comes from those Hollywood movie westerns maybe, but to change the look/nature of the character would be to dilute the impact, I feel.

Originally posted by mojoworking
The stereotype comes from those Hollywood movie westerns maybe, but to change the look/nature of the character would be to dilute the impact, I feel.

Yeah, to me and you, but why not offer a new stereotype to kids growing up today? Then they can complain in 70 years when people want to update it.

Don't get me wrong, I see no harm in the stereotype of the cowboy with guns, it didn't do me any harm when i was growing up, and neither did my toy soldiers or the toy guns i had. I just don't think it's about political correctness.

It calls not just for a fogeyish splutter, but for an anguished cry of hatred! How dare they meddle with such a well-loved, British cultural icon in the name of poilitical correctness?! I suppose the new, postmodern, multicultural Dan will require a "gay" partner, and he will eschew Cow pie for a vegan finger-buffet. Clad in a Sarong rather than reactionary, and imperialist Cowboy gear, he will reject his former role as a phallocentric agent of patriarchy and embrace his new role as non-judgemental, non-gendered Danni. I need to leave the room to be sick.

He he. I like your style, my friend :)

Once again The Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004 leap straight in and blame political correctness without checking the facts:

The comic book cowboy will cover his gun, ditch the fags, dump his spurs and lose some weight in a bid to modernise to The Dandy and win back its dwindling readership.
The magazine’s Ben Gray told the Daily Mirror: “We want to take Dan back to his roots and make him extraordinary again.
“We want him to remain the larger-than-life character who causes mayhem because he doesn’t know his own strength.”
The Dandy, which is the world’s longest running comic, will also feature new characters such as Dreadlock Holmes and troublesome school kid Jak.
Gray commented: “Kids need to be engaged by characters and stories they can really identify with. They haven’t lost their sense of fun, but there’s the possibility that the old Dandy has become a bit boring.”

No mention of PCness by the magazine's publisher there.

Originally posted by max
Once again The Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004 leap straight in and blame political correctness without checking the facts:

No mention of PCness by the magazine's publisher there.

To paraphrase Christine Keeler: well, they would say that, wouldn't they?

They're not going to come right out and say it. They have to dress it up in PR speak for the media, but it all adds up to the same thing in the end.

Originally posted by mojoworking
To paraphrase Christine Keeler: well, they would say that, wouldn't they?

They're not going to come right out and say it. They have to dress it up in PR speak for the media, but it all adds up to the same thing in the end.

To paraphrase Christine Keeler: well, you would say that, wouldn't you?

Why let reality interfere with a good rant?

If Desperate Dan is fine as he is, why don't kids wanna read about him anymore?

Maybe they just don't know what they want, eh? Maybe they are being brain-washed by all this PCness.

Originally posted by Snook
If Desperate Dan is fine as he is, why don't kids wanna read about him anymore?

Maybe they just don't know what they want, eh? Maybe they are being brain-washed by all this PCness.

If we are to believe what we read about kids today, then they want to see MORE shooting, violence, blood & guts.

In which case I can't believe more kids will read the Dandy if Dan loses his gun!

Well maybe we should just wait and see what the kids think, that'd be better than trying to decide for them, eh? :D

Max, it is a tad discourteous of you as moderator to call contributors who blame pc, "thick as pig poo". To dissent from your opinion is not a sign of subnormal levels of intelligence. I blame pc actually. The publishers, in my view are guilty of pandering to the left/liberal consensus here with their "Dreadlock Holmes" [little bit there for the multiculturalists], and their ludicrous, feminized, neutred Dan in an attempt to boost circulation. I'll bet it doesn't work. Children are not easily patronised these days, and can spot attempts at social engineering, i.e, the "multicultural" tokenism used in so much of childrens' television, attempts to challenge "imposed gender roles" etc, etc. The mistake the publishers, and television execs are making is that most children do not live in a multi-ethnic, inner-city area, and most children are socialised into traditional gender roles.

Mojoworking, glad I made you laugh. I like your style too, my friend.

Timo, sorry if you find the term a tad discourteous. It was invented by a fellow mod as a counter to the pejorative use of the terms PC Brigade, or do-gooders both of which The Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004 apply to anyone who disagrees with their view point.

As to my being a mod, the views are my own and any attempt to curtail my right of free speech is not welcome.

Originally posted by max
Timo, sorry if you find the term a tad discourteous.

Which is not quite the same as 'being sorry'

Originally posted by max
Timo, sorry if you find the term a tad discourteous. It was invented by a fellow mod as a counter to the pejorative use of the terms PC Brigade, or do-gooders both of which The Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004 apply to anyone who disagrees with their view point.

As to my being a mod, the views are my own and any attempt to curtail my right of free speech is not welcome.

Let's face it, as a witty riposte, "Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004" is hardly up there with Oscar Wilde, is it?

I 'm betting the "fellow mod" who sweated buckets over that one was Tony, right?

Why so defensively paranoid about the PC tag anyway?

Originally posted by mojoworking
Let's face it, as a witty riposte, "Thick as Pigpoo Brigade© 2004" is hardly up there with Oscar Wilde, is it?

I 'm betting the "fellow mod" who sweated buckets over that one was Tony, right? You got that one wrong too mojo... hmm ironic?

Originally posted by Tony
You got that one wrong too mojo... hmm ironic?

Why don't you name the actual author then Tony? Congratulations are in order for such rapier-like wit.

Hehe, I don't think that's up to me mojo. ;) I'm not actually sure who it was in any case. Must be getting old :)

Originally posted by Tony
Hehe, I don't think that's up to me mojo. ;) I'm not actually sure who it was in any case. Must be getting old :)

Fair enough, but I don't see why you're being so coy :)

Anyway, back to Desperate Dan. As some people may know, some of the most famous Dandy/Beano characters have been immortalised as "life-size" bronze statues in Dundee city centre (the home of D.C.Thompson). Alongside Dennis the Menace & his dog Gnasher are statues of Beryl the Peril and of course Desperate Dan.

It will come as no surprise that the seven foot statue of Dan is complete with gun, holster and spurs. The citizens of Dundee must be horrified.

That's an interesting selection of statues!

On the Isle of Man they have life size bronzes of Norman Wisdom sat on a normal bench and George Formby leaning on a lamppost in his TT gear!

It's a bit surreal when you come across them for the first time at night after a couple of beers! Mind you - the picture I have of a friend copping a feel of the bronze Norman is priceless. Mr Wisdom would love it ;) He was 90 the other day you know :D

The point being of course - statues are moments in time captured in metal!

Max, may I assure you that my intention was never to "curtail" your "free speech". Perhaps the use of the term "pc" has become a little predictable and cliched. However, what are cliches if not superb metaphors? As I hopefully made clear in my previous posting, the term "pc" really equals [at least for me] the values of the left/liberal consensus. Many leftwingers in politics, education media etc have been fighting a war for several decades against expressions of traditional masculinity/femininity, patriotism, and the canons of Western art, music, literature and philosophy. Despite the risible nature of the subject matter [Desperate Dan], this is yet another example of the pervading influence of this consensus. In my experience it is those of the political left, rather than the right, who too readily apply negative labels to things they do not understand. They are passionately in favour of "free speech", as long as they agree with the content.

Has Political Correctness gone mad?

I ask all those people who consider themselves politically correct that if a terrorist, religious fundamentalist, or any other group known to kill innocent people.

Were to hold a gun to one of your family’s heads


Would you still be politically correct!!!!!

Oh yes.

I would say "Now look here, you non-gender specific, mentally disadvantaged, person. Lay down your weapon and release my relative immediately. Unless you think I'm being ethnocentric? Does your religion or culture compell you to blow the head off? Oh, ok, in that case, proceed! "

Originally posted by Male_Masseur
Has Political Correctness gone mad?

I ask all those people who consider themselves politically correct that if a terrorist, religious fundamentalist, political activist, or any other group known to kill innocent people.

Were to hold a gun to one of your family’s heads


Would you still be politically correct!!!!!

Whilst not being politically correct, I do object to political activists being in your group of ne'er do wells.

A political activist is typically the person who canvasses you before an election.... :)

Whilst the major parties may be keen on my vote, I don't believe that they'll hold a gun to my head in order to get it.

Joe

Ok i understand what you are saying so I have changed it to extreme political activists.

Originally posted by Male_Masseur
OK Extreme political activists.


*wonders when the last time was that an extreme political activist held a gun to someone's head in this country?*

Some of them don't have to. Prescott, for instance, simply gives opponents a good whacking. Oh, and as for the gun thing, it'll be the last time somebody was persuaded by a member of the IRA.

OK have taken Extreme political activist out!!! of the equation.

Welcome to the forum Male_Masseur.

I don't wish to appear nit-picking, but can I first take issue with your choice of non-de-plume. I mean, Male_Masseur? In this day and age, surely you should have opted for the non-gender specific Person Masseur?

Have you not heard of equal opportunities? Weren't you taught about female emancipation at school? Haven't you noticed that we have eradicated such sexist job descriptions as firemen (now re-styled fire-fighters) and actresses (now re-styled actors) from our language?

Your inappropriate prefix of Male is clearly a blatent sexist sop to the reactionary forces of female suppression, and cannot go unchallenged. In fact, on reflection, I urge all politically correct devotees to boycott answering your question until such time as you rename yourself Extreme Male_Masseur.



:hihi:

I have only one thing to say

Whiteboard

This is a blatant attempt to undermine white people and I think it should be renamed not the colour of your skin, we did not mean to be offensive board.

All writing tools like black and brown and white crayons should be renamed, multi coloured ethnically aware writing devices.

In fact everything should be green, and then we cannot upset anybody.

Unless the Martians land, then we have problems!!! And I bet they will be the first to sue for their rights.

OH shut up MM your being pedantic

Christ...and to think that I went to all the effort of getting out of bed for this?!?

Mod:

Various PC threads merged