One of the interesting features of modern public debate is the emergence of a small army of thin-skinned souls on permanent stand-by to be offended by pretty much everything.

And they call that entertainment.

The way we talk, the jokes we crack, the way we describe each other, all these things are subject to such an increasingly prohibitive set of strictures that it is easier to keep your mouth shut for fear of upsetting someone.

While the scourge of mental illness is not to be taken lightly, and is something which has touched us all, it still puzzles me that one of Australia’s leading mental health organisations is spending its time vetting newspaper articles and sending letters to journalists asking that they excise certain figurative expressions from their writing.

My colleague Tory Maguire wrote a piece last year where she used the term “policy schizophrenia” to describe the then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s inconsistency on border protection. She received a letter saying the term was an insult to schizophrenics everywhere and that she should not use it again.

If we take this approach we will end up with a language where ideas are never stillborn and pauses never pregnant, where movement can be impeded but not retarded, where we rewrite all of Shakespeare’s plays, and receive letters from the haemophiliacs association if we write a column stating the bleeding obvious.

One of the weirder examples of the new squeamishness came from an unusual source this week, those supposedly libertarian sensualists at the Eros Foundation, who issued a press release under the cracking headline “Customs seizes dwarf porn.” The press release was interesting not so much for the news that the films Midget Mania (Volumes 7 and 8) have been refused classification – well, that’s my weekend buggered – but more for the politically correct gymnastics the Eros Foundation used to tip-toe around the word “midget”.

The intro was pure gold: “The Australian Customs Service has set a new benchmark for the importation of adult films into Australia by confiscating two of the latest release US titles featuring vertically challenged people.” Eros CEO Fiona Patton said the ruling was “discriminatory to short-statured people and quite possibly offended the Federal Discrimination Act.” It will be interesting to see if it stands up in court.

It is in the area of racism where the trend is most pronounced. I received a yawn-inducing string of outrage this week after writing the most limp-wristed pro-republican column, which was barely republican at all, more a pathetic form of surrender at the fact that we all seem to like the royals so much and can’t agree on an alternative model that we’re stuck as a constitutional monarchy. In passing I noted that this was all a bit disappointing for republican ultra-minimalists who simply wanted an Australian head of state, and would also be happier if the Pommy flag no longer sullied our national ensign.

The use of the word Pommy sent several readers into apoplexy, no doubt because they were, you know, Poms.

From one reader: “Pommy flag? That’s a racist slur. Lucky it’s a racial attack against the white majority, otherwise, you’d be before the courts like Andrew Bolt was.” From another: “Getting the pommy bit off our flag are downright pathetic comments in fact they border on racist.” And another: “I have no interest in anything you have to say, it’s rude, tactless and uncivil…to talk about the pommy flag is just so rude I can’t believe you actually printed it.”

And so the whinge-fest continued. Another recent column, about the Andrew Bolt vilification case, was highly critical of his writing but said the judgment posed a threat to free expression as it put the onus on anybody to prove they were not racist should somebody take offence at their sentiments. Examples included declaring that the Serbs who disrupted the Australian Open should maybe bugger off to Serbia, the opinion that female circumcision by some African communities is barbaric and inhumane, the belief that Israel is a pariah state whose businesses should be the subject of a formal boycott. Several censorious folks wrote in saying that each of these opinions were potentially racist and should also be the subject of legal action under the Racial Discrimination Act. See you all in court, along with the people of short stature.

The stink over the performance of the Haka by the All Blacks in Sunday’s final was a double treat for those who enjoy being offended. First, there was there were claims that one of the Kiwis had made an apparently offensive throat-slitting gesture while performing the chant. So what if he had? This ain’t the chicken dance or the bus stop. The haka in its origins was a war dance performed by pumped-up Maori warriors shortly before they killed their enemies. The idea that it should be rendered more genteel is absurd.

After this kerfuffle it emerged that the French had not shown due deference to the haka by stepping forwards towards the All Blacks as it was being performed. This was also offensive and the team was fined, in keeping with the view that, out of respect for Maori tradition, opposing teams should stand there and do nothing. This too seems kind of absurd. If a bunch of blokes are sticking their tongues out and threatening to murder you, it seems only fair that opposing teams can respond, perhaps in a manner which is culturally appropriate –some mooning from the Wallabies, Morris dancing from the Poms, the French standing around waiting to be saved by another nation, in keeping with their historical traditions.

Meanwhile the Adelaide Zoo has cancelled its Free Rangas Day after complaints from redheads. Turn it up. Even Julia Gillard could crack a quality gag about her state of ranga-ness when she spoke to fellow blood nut Cameron Ling at the AFL Grand Final breakfast. Someone was probably offended by that too. Still what would you expect from a Prime Minister who wouldn’t curtsy before the Queen. Even though protocol says she didn’t have to, and did nothing wrong.

The whole thing is just offensive.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, was the final in our Festival of Obvious Ideas series. If it didn’t already have such a good headline, we would have topped it with Festival of Obvious Ideas #16: Harden up, Australia.

166 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • David says:

      07:20pm | 02/11/11

      Penbo, you are the best thing going for News Limited and Journalism on the whole in Australia right now. Please, please keep it coming!!

    • Christine Boulter says:

      06:29pm | 29/10/11

      What a great article….thanks for writing this and giving us all a happy little read and think…and then comment.  I love this view on the politically incorrect madness that we now live with

    • Simone says:

      09:57am | 29/10/11

      Call me a ranga and I’ll be very flattered. The packet that said ‘Copper Gold Highlights’ was money well spent!

    • JD says:

      08:31am | 29/10/11

      Call me a Ranga and I’ll sue your ass.. its fair, I wouldnt survive 5 mins in Australia calling an Islander a coconut. Shame my country has come to this .

    • Casey says:

      05:37pm | 28/10/11

      He said “blood nut.”  The SOCIETY FOR MENTALLY ILL HAEMOPHILLIACS is watching YOU matey!  Also, saying that a person of short stature is height challenged is a very low act.

    • PaxUs says:

      05:36pm | 28/10/11

      Sticks and stones can break my bones but names will never hurt me.

    • Dragon says:

      03:08pm | 28/10/11

      “the emergence of a small army of thin-skinned souls” - SMALL - from where I’m standing, there seems to be way too many people everywhere that are looking, intently, for something new to be offended about. The age of political correctness. One day, hopefully, our future humans will understand the world better than we and when that time comes, I do think we’ll be one of the most non respected and ridiculed eras of the worlds history. And the irony here resides purely in the fact that we all think we’re doing so well…

    • Aussie Wazza says:

      02:23pm | 28/10/11

      MARLEY
      Telling lies will get you into hell.

    • marley says:

      02:46pm | 28/10/11

      @Aussie Wazza - but what if I don’t believe in hell?

    • Rowley Burkin says:

      01:59pm | 28/10/11

      Spoken like a true Australian, although making out that the Wallabies would be mooning is a little self serving!!! Like they’re all larakins, pigs arse. Australian’s have NO, ZERO, NIL humour, a kind of dish it out and can’t take it culture more like. Your being over run by aussie drongo’s who don’t want you to say ‘boo to a goose’. I’m proudly Pommy, not British, English one hundred percent, call me what you ever you want. Just don’t call me Australian. God save your Queen.

    • sunny says:

      03:58pm | 28/10/11

      Geez Rowley don’t have a wombat, we’re all mates aren’t we sport?

    • Anna C says:

      01:59pm | 28/10/11

      I wonder what Customs intends on doing with the dwarf porn that they confiscated, apart from watching it for professional reasons of course?  Very interesting.

    • Eugene says:

      01:09pm | 28/10/11

      David,
      The haka with the throat slitting gesture was written less than 10 years ago. The original Haka writthen by the Maori Chief generations ago when they did warm up before battle and real carnage had none of those type of actions…I am a Kiwi and I find that throat slitting gesture repugnant

    • sunny says:

      03:54pm | 28/10/11

      the throat slitting gesture is not the worst of it, in some forms of the haka they repeatedly slap the forearm of the clenched fist that is extended out toward the opponents, like they’re gesturing “we will ram these giant fists up your scrum-holes BEFORE we get around to murdering you” .. it’s definitely more unsettling than the throat slitting gesture.

    • Kat says:

      12:59pm | 28/10/11

      Hilarious!  I had a right good chuckle!  Excellently written!

    • Long Memory says:

      12:54pm | 28/10/11

      I seem to remember the author of this piece getting bent out of all recognisable shape when those mean old poms on Top Gear said mean things about his favourite country, Mexico.

      Apparently everything is fair game except Central American stereotypes.

    • Wayne Kerr says:

      12:41pm | 28/10/11

      Political correctness has definitely gone too far and as others have noted people are just chomping at the bit to be offended.

      I could tell a joke about 2 Afghan migrants and I bet I would be lynched.  The reality is though that the joke is making fun of Australians.  Because the “main characters” are from Afghanistan I would be labelled a racist.

      That’s a prime example of PC gone mad.

    • Glenn says:

      12:39pm | 28/10/11

      The cancelled remake of the “Dam Busters” by Peter Jackson was to have the name of Guy Gibsons dog changed from Nigger to Tigger. So much for factual history. However, if Peter jackson had of been of African American descent, then i’m guessing, had the remake gone ahead, the dogs name would have been kept intact.

    • esteban says:

      04:15pm | 29/10/11

      Glenn. I was only talking to a friend who is a mature age history student at Uni. he was doing some group work on the dam busters with younger students. he was forced to not use the word nigger in reference to Guy gibson’s dog.

      Artistic licence is one thing but poor old “nigger” is to be expunged from history papers.

      The word nigger is offensive but can history be doctored to accomodate our contemporary views?

      An interesting aside is the events of 1999 when white mayoral aid David Howard used the word “niggardly’ in a budget speach. The Black Mayor, Anthony Williams had pressure put on him to sack Howard who ended up resigning.

      But here is the kicker. Howard is gay and his forced resignation caused outrage in the gay community and Williams was forced to offer Howard his job back. True story. Gay outrage trumps black outrage

    • JP says:

      03:29pm | 29/10/11

      @ Glenn. 
      That depends. Luckily the dog was a black Labrador Retriever. If it wasnt I guess then to be PC [altho then not historically correct] they would have to have it changed cos it then wouldve been offensive to African Americans to have a non black dog called Nigger when the word was used as a reference to those folk.
      But if Peter Jackson was of African American descent it wouldnt have to be changed cos he then wouldve just called it Niggah. But just dont any of you whiteys call him that cos thats offensive to all African Americans. Same goes for Tigger - cos we know you really mean to say Nigger.  So you can call him Fido.

      I remember an episode of The Goodies about the Grand National horse race, where they find a black horse and they run towards it in slow motion. When they get to the horse they decide to keep him but have to decide on a name. What will we call him? He’s black and he’s a beauty. Lets call him Nigger.  I wonder if that still exists in the show?

    • HD says:

      12:08pm | 28/10/11

      well finally, someone had to say it!! I will be sharing this.

    • Blind Freddy says:

      11:28am | 28/10/11

      I like all the tough, straight talking righties who cry when they get called a “denier”. PC? Much.

      They can give it but can’t take it. Remember the way they sulked when their precious anti-carbon price rally was called inconsequential and people factually noted their geriatric condition?

    • Bev says:

      02:02pm | 28/10/11

      Blind Freddy says:02:26pm | 28/10/11

      @Tim and Bev

      the difference is that the right seem to think that PC only happens to them. PC is an accusative term used, by the right, to deride the left.

      No the difference is that the left attempt to take the high moral ground by being offended on behalf of .................  A lot of the time the offended party the left are offended on behalf of really don’t give a damn. They are all in favour of free speach for them nobody else. Anyway who invented PC?  Certainly not the right.

    • Blind Freddy says:

      01:26pm | 28/10/11

      @Tim and Bev

      I aggree that both sides use the same type of labelling- the difference is that the right seem to think that PC only happens to them. PC is an accusative term used, by the right, to deride the left.

      P.S. I am an equal opportunity lover.

    • Bev says:

      01:15pm | 28/10/11

      The same people who were objecting to signs “ditch the witch”  are from the same left wing group (earlier generation) who carried signs “burn the witch”  when protesting against Pauline Hanson. Seems they can give it but can’t take it too.

    • Tim says:

      11:50am | 28/10/11

      haha,
      you’re joking right?
      The same people whinging about those unemployed geriatric derros are the same people supporting the unemployed, unwashed hippies who are trying to occupy everywhere. Hypocrisy is not limited to any one side of politics.

      Me - I’m an equal opportunity hater.

    • Wynn says:

      10:57am | 28/10/11

      “some mooning from the Wallabies, Morris dancing from the Poms, the French standing around waiting to be saved by another nation” - Gold!

    • Vic says:

      10:54am | 28/10/11

      How true what you have said. I am a person who is too tall to be a (INSERT PC WORD OF CHOICE) but is too short to be concidered normal by many. I thank my parents for teaching me to get over it and do what you do best. It gave me the ability to show people that did like to call me names that I did not car and now I just say tell me one I haven’t heard. I must admit though there have been times when a good one has been said and I have found myself rolling on the floor laughing. So my parents have taught me to be the best at what I can do and not to take myself too serious and when it is funny even though at your expence have a laugh. With my first name and hight it was that or get into a fight every day.

    • Luce says:

      10:52am | 28/10/11

      Good rant, Penbo, and I agree 100%. People need to chill the f**k out and get some perspective #firstworldproblems

    • RyaN says:

      10:29am | 28/10/11

      Look at it this way, no one in Australia can really be offended, just look at the offensive government we have.

    • cretin says:

      10:14am | 28/10/11

      ” Eros CEO Fiona Patton said the ruling was “discriminatory to short-statured people and quite possibly offended the Federal Discrimination Act.” It will be interesting to see if it stands up in court.
      _______________

      Will it need a chair to stand on?  BOOM-TISH!!

    • Cherry Gripe says:

      09:40am | 28/10/11

      You’re a bit behind the times, David. The Adelaide Zoo ‘ranga’ campaign was cancelled three years ago.

      And really, if you were a redhead, wouldn’t you be mildly offended to be called an ape? I realise that picking on redheads is the last ‘acceptable’ form of discrimination, and yes, we do have broad shoulders, but it’s still getting a bit old. No one is allowed to tell Irish jokes any more because they’re racist. Blonde jokes are sexist. Offering dying children sticks instead of Disney trips is just outrageous. Face it. It’s human nature to find some group and pick on them. People suck and that’s all there is to it. How about some equal opportunity discrimination? Could we start by abusing 40ish white males with a single eyebrow, perhaps?

    • Luce says:

      01:04pm | 28/10/11

      I don’t think I’ve ever encountered someone who was offended by Irish jokes, especially the Irish people I know.

      Same with blonde jokes, and even ranga jokes (black jokes appear to still be a little sensitive, however).

      And no one should be offended by being called an ape, because *newsflash* we are apes. All of us, not just the rangas. Besides, what you’re thinking of is an orangutan.

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      12:51pm | 28/10/11

      If I were a redhead, I’d think ‘Yay, free trip to the zoo’.. end of. I’m sure the majority of red heads would have thought the same thing & enjoyed their free trip to the zoo..

      But a few of you would have been dreadfully offended, and ruined it for everyone who could actually realise that comparing your hair colour to the colour of an orangutans is not the same thing as calling you an ape.

      Some people just want to be offended.

    • Chris L says:

      11:04am | 28/10/11

      I still tell blonde jokes, and Irish jokes, and Kiwi jokes. I’ve heard Kiwi’s tell Aussie jokes and I’ve heard women tell Man jokes. I laugh at the funny ones and shrug my shoulders at the flat ones.

      I like to think I’m valuable, but not precious grin

    • Leah says:

      10:36am | 28/10/11

      Blonde was a hair colour, not a sex, last I checked.

    • Ellie says:

      09:39am | 28/10/11

      This is absolutely excellent!

    • Aussie Wazza says:

      09:37am | 28/10/11

      I have extreme difficulty understanding how people can be offended by comments about their being not in some way perfect.

      But that’s probably because I am perfect.

    • marley says:

      10:07am | 28/10/11

      No you’re not.  Are you offended?

    • Jezz says:

      09:28am | 28/10/11

      As a person cursed with floppy forearm syndrome (FFS) I object to your use of the term ‘limp-wristed’ in this article! Outrageous!

    • malohi says:

      05:36pm | 28/10/11

      so when I see the replys for morons such as
      “Harden up FFS”
      it could just be them reaching out for a cure for the infliction which you share?

    • Dan says:

      09:15am | 28/10/11

      Brilliant article David, about time someone had a go at the useless whiney people who sit around waiting to be offended.

      We only call the British Poms because we like them, if you don’t have a nickname you’re not accepted in Australia… thank god the Kiwis haven’t gotten upset yet… or have they???

    • fairsfair says:

      09:13am | 28/10/11

      You may be absolutely floored to hear this, but I am a whinger and I love it. I find it funny, amusing, a conversation point - I just love it. I’m known as the whinger amongst my friends and they (claim to) love me for it.

      I have to admit though, some people take it a bit far sometimes. I generally stop at using my whinging to criticise people directly. I think I am a “bitchy whinger” in that I usually do it indirectly so it doesn’t create any kind of confrontation. It’s the strayan way.

      I thought customs were too busy striking to be busting peeps for midget porn? Anyway, I once posted the below piece of arwork by Banksy as my facebook profile picture because I thought it was quite profound in its simple design, but thought provoking message. I was called a racist and told to take it down. Needless to say I defriended those people and kept the photo, but seriously - racist?

      http://www.banksyunmasked.co.uk/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=502

      That said, it is exactly the same as the English whinging about the “pommy flag”. I personally think a lot of white people look to make an issue to try and prove the rediculousness of the level of PC afforded to minority groups. It isn’t working though, because they are further being criticised for it.

      Oh and for the record, all of the racism cries came from white people.

    • marley says:

      06:13pm | 28/10/11

      @fairsfair - I’ve been thinking about this, and studying the picture - much more interesting than I thought Banksy’s stuff would be, by the way, so thanks for making me take him seriously.

      I guess I’d go for your basic argument - these are basic, early human hunters confronted with the modern world.  They could be from anywhere - they’re not obviously aboriginal or bushmen or Zulus or North American Indians.  So, I say they’re early “homo sapiens sapiens” - the parents of us all.

      Of course, I’m being quite dismissive of “homo sapiens neandertalis” - so I guess even that view is un-PC to some.  Maybe we should just try being polite instead of worrying about being PC.

    • Chris L says:

      10:59am | 28/10/11

      @Fairs - I think it’s the drama. I knew a person who had to find something to be upset about at all times. Something her brother said, something on television, a sign on the road. One time she saw an elderly lady struggling to carry her bag and spent an evening relaying to me how tragic it was that nobody assisted her (I knew not to ask shy she didn’t assist the lady).

      Some people just want to be offended and will find a way not matter what.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:08am | 28/10/11

      My issue is that I would not even define them as Aboriginal Australians. To me the image merely represents early human hunters, and that is the juxtaposition of the artwork (that was generated in the UK). There is no colour, they could be white shaded black, black shaded white - their hair is not in keeping with actual images I have seen of Aboriginals when the first settlers arrived. Are they african? But what is PC doing to us when you have people taking “offence” on behalf of another people? Is is because that is they way they think they should be reacting, or do they actually genuinely think that I am a racist because I happen to like a piece of graffiti developed by a UK based artist?

    • BannedRightWingNutJob says:

      09:49am | 28/10/11

      I’ve only seen Aborigines dressed like that at “Official” government ceremonies. Everytime I went to Redfern to do research at Syd Uni, I never got a “Welcome to Country” greeting either - ROFLMFAO

    • Dan is a bit offended says:

      09:11am | 28/10/11

      But the only reason I come to the Punch is to have a whinge.
      Now I feel like I’m not welcome and to be honest I’m a little bit offended by that.
      Way to ruin my Friday…....

      It’s Friday, Friday
      Gotta get down on Friday
      Everybody’s lookin’ forward to the weekend, weekend
      ....

    • Luce says:

      01:37pm | 28/10/11

      To concentrate on work you should probably avoid trawling through all the comments on punch articles wink

      ...not that I can really talk.

    • I hate pi..gotta get down on Friday says:

      09:49am | 28/10/11

      Damn you Dan; now that song’s stuck in my head. How am I meant to concentrate on work when all I can think of is the fact that it’s Friday, and I’m looking forward to the weekend?

    • I hate pies says:

      09:43am | 28/10/11

      ...that song is the most offensive thing to come from a human’s mouth in the history of the world; no exaggeration

    • Zeus says:

      09:07am | 28/10/11

      I think it is wonderful that vertically challenged people (aka dwarfs, little people or midgets) have a height advantage when it comes to some sexual positions, especially when both parties are standing up !!!!!

    • stephen says:

      06:56pm | 28/10/11

      And don’t forget, if they gotta bend over, they ain’t got too far to touch the ground.
      (Won’t be long before we see some midget NRL players.)

    • gobsmack says:

      01:12pm | 28/10/11

      That’s nice to know Zeus.
      I must admit I was trying not to think too much about the sexual possiblities that being 3 foot tall offered.

    • Zeus says:

      10:04am | 28/10/11

      It’s obvious Gobsmack that you have not enjoyed the same sexual activities I’ve had. Conservative I may be in my politics, but not when it comes to you know what !!!!!!  I’d make the author of the Karma Sutra blush with what I’ve tried - ROFLMFAO. Any midgets on here by the way - we could have drinks up on Oxford Street ???

    • gobsmack says:

      09:44am | 28/10/11

      I was thinking that being vertically challenged is irrelevant when you’re indulging in a bit of horizontal folk dancing.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      09:06am | 28/10/11

      Meh. Political correctness gone mad isn’t really a problem for people with a large vocabulary. I’m sure in all the examples you’ve provided. For example instead of telling Serbs to “bugger off back to Serbia” you could write “Australians have a very low tolerance for migrants brining conflict to a nation at peace”. If you have problems with the mental health advocates, perhaps have a drink with them sometime and nut it out between you back channel rather than biting back in an article. I’m pretty confident you can come up with something that works for both of you.

      Feedback over. Happy weekend.

    • malohi says:

      05:20pm | 28/10/11

      @Kheiron
      The ghost of Lewis Carroll just vomited.

    • Kheiron says:

      04:31pm | 28/10/11

      It’s really got nothing to do with how you phrase it, or your use of ‘slang’ terms, or lack there of. It is, purely, about the people taking offence.

      As has been said many times before offence is not given, it is taken.
      If someone of short stature chose to take offence at being called ‘someone of short stature’ then, surprise, that term becomes offensive. Doesn’t matter how eloquently you put it.

      If you can never say what you mean, you can never mean what you say.

    • Erick says:

      04:29pm | 28/10/11

      @HappyCynic - “You can make a point, any point at all (as long as it’s accurate) without resorting to petty insults and terms that people may find offensive.”

      So why couldn’t you make your point - if you had one - without resorting to petty insults and offensive terms?

    • HappyCynic says:

      03:47pm | 28/10/11

      @Bev

      If you can’t say something tactfully, get an education, read some more, extend your vocabulary.

      This whole whinging and whining about “PC” (whatever that is) is just an excuse to hide your lack of language skills.  “Oh I can’t call a redhead a ranga, those PC people are trying to stop me from thinking” for example, is just hiding the fact that you lack the vocabulary skills to skirt around the imaginary ban on ‘ranga’ by calling them a ginger, a carrot-top, a fire-crotch, rusty, ginger nut, a weasley and so many more.

      You can make a point, any point at all (as long as it’s accurate) without resorting to petty insults and terms that people may find offensive.  If you lack the education to do so though, keep your mouth shut until you’ve obtained the knowledge necessary to make your point tactfully.

      This “think before you speak” mentality combined with the “construct your argument consistently” attitude also has the added benefit of arming you with enough information to deflect criticism and supporting your position and any opposition.

    • Matt says:

      03:24pm | 28/10/11

      @hottub

      I dont think it gets to the heart of the matter at all. You’re actually saying different things in each of these examples. You don’t mention the migrants that Australians have a low tolerance for or the resolution that Australians have posed, James doesnt mention what the culture is changing to or (some) people’s reaction to the change, and Tim’s example changes from a position of chastising a demographic to empathising with them. None of the examples get to the heart of the matter, instead they are all forced to change the matter and convey a very different message.

      I think there is a place for PC, but I think it’s well overused. If Australian culture is changing to become more Asian, we should be able to say so without having to dilute the message like James’ example. Indeed, we should even be able to say that we’re scared about the change, which is intrinsically all that James’ example says. This is drastically different to saying something inciting hate, aggression and violence.

    • AdamC says:

      03:10pm | 28/10/11

      I don’t agree that PC is simply a matter of language. I recall being at a morning tea with some eminently typical, middle-class folk (some a little on the old-side, I will admit) when one guest, when the topic turned to matters political, came out with:

      “Well, I think we should simply stop all muslim immigration to Australia.”

      Of course, the response was stunned silence. This was despite the fact many in the room probably agreed with the sentiment. (And I knew many more were at least sympathetic to it) And, while direct, the language of the proposer of the ban was neutral and not at all inflammatory. But, think about it, how often do you ever hear anyone publicly say something like that, no matter how politely?

      Ultimately, the PC movement seeks to censor ideas, not merely change the language.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      01:29pm | 28/10/11

      I guess we have reached the point we’re we just have to agree to disagree. I think (like most people I guess) I have some views that run very counter to mainstream opinion in my society. I’ve never felt like I’m under “conditioning” to not think like this, its always possible to resist ideas – even taken for granted assumptions. But I guess if my conditioning was unconscious I wouldn’t know anyway ?.

      I guess I can only talk from anecdote, but I suspect the fact I (mostly) avoid using slang terms makes me a far more persuasive communicator of controversial ideas than would otherwise be the case.

    • Bev says:

      01:00pm | 28/10/11

      hot tub political machine says:01:28pm | 28/10/11

      Bev I think the important concept here is cencoring ideas vs censoring content.

      I disagree as I pointed out.  Ideas to be known must be articulated.  PC tries to censor what you think indirectly by censoring what you say.  In the end the aim is for you to erect a barrier in you head that stops you thinking those thoughts let alone speaking them. 

      I did get the jist of your example but it is a bad one in that both are now being subject to attack. As to throttling whatever challenged was a substitute for words considered non-PC.  I have heard mutterings around the traps that somehow challenged is suggesting there is something wrong with those people.  So we will in time need a new term,  Probably more restrictive than the present. So I do not (as I said) think different articulation is any help.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      12:28pm | 28/10/11

      Bev I think the important concept here is cencoring ideas vs censoring content.

      For example, if you want to write an article aguing that paedophila is a social good - you shouldn’t be cencored. But if you want to publish child pornography - you should be cencored.

      In language we can do the same thing, you can express ideas which are offensive - but you shouldn’t be able to use the offensive slang terms. Just having to be creative in your’e language needn’t censor anyone from expressing a view.

    • Bev says:

      11:45am | 28/10/11

      I disagree as PC is in the end aimed at changing the way you think.  So as the web tightens the ability to excape PC becomes less and less altering what you say and the way you say will not help as each succeeding substitution in turn becomes unacceptable throttling the way we speak and think.  It is a attack on free speach but a subtle one but in the end has the same effect as banning free speach only the control is in each individuals head.  At that stage who needs laws
      as so clearly articulated in 1984.

      http://www.ourcivilisation.com/pc.htm

      The Inevitable Result Of Political Correctness
      By using the excuse of not upsetting anyone, the politically correct are demanding that people behave like the fool who would please everyone; that everyone must become such a fool! All must accept the notions of the Politically Correct as truth, or else! This is the same mentality that inspired the Inquisition and forced Galileo to recant; the same mentality that inspired the Nazis and obtained the Holocaust. Once expression gets placed in a straitjacket of official truth, then the madness that occurs in all totalitarian states is obtained. Life, in private and public, becomes a meaningless charade where delusion thrives and terror rules.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      11:06am | 28/10/11

      The thing is Tim – it isn’t waffle, its actually getting to heart of the matter.

      In all the examples here (yours, James1’s and mine) we’ve actually articulated ourselves much better by using decent English as opposed to the slogans. Use of language should be about better communication, actually expressing you’re point well. I think there are some good example here. I don’t see any waffle and I daresay anyone reading the better articulated points would understand our message far better reading this wording than if we’d used the slogans.

    • Tim says:

      10:21am | 28/10/11

      So your point is that if you can confuse the offence merchants by waffling around an issue instead of being direct, then you can escape censure?
      Cool let me try:
      “Caucasians of lower socio-economic backgrounds struggle to break the cycle of welfare dependency, which can create social tensions and higher rates of criminal activity in areas in which they live.”
      Instead of:
      “Bogans are low-life dole scum who live in ghettos and steal stuff”

    • James1 says:

      10:05am | 28/10/11

      Banned, what about tennis?

    • BannedRightWingNutJob says:

      09:34am | 28/10/11

      If we banned Soccer there would be no problems with the Serbs in Oz !!!

    • James1 says:

      09:22am | 28/10/11

      Indeed.  In the majority of cases, people can still express their opinions and be politically correct.  They just need to be more articulate and exact in their use of language in doing so.

      Another good example: instead of “Australia is in danger of being swamped by Asians”, you could say “Due to Australia’s immigration program, the cultural and ethnic makeup of this country is shifting”.  Means the same thing, but the latter one does not characterise Asians as dangerous.

    • wearestardust says:

      09:04am | 28/10/11

      “Pretty much anything” - quite.  One of the more perverse aspects of this sickness of actively seeking out things to be offended by that besets Australia is the tendency to be offended on behalf of others.  The whole Chaser’s ‘make a reasonable wish foundation’ nonsense.  Not to mention the response to Ms Shepherd’s very pertinent question as to what kind of fuckwit shoots a giraffe.  I have no evidence to provde to me that the compainants are not testicle-less midget giraffephobes who need a minigun to defend themselves from the world because of PTSD induced by not being breast-fed (or breast-fed for too long), so I am forced to assume that they are.

      Where was I?  Oh, yes.  +1 to Tim.  The essence of being Australian - as a friend put it to me, in response to advertisements telling us what we have to do on Australia Day - is to be able to tell others just to fuck off.

    • RED says:

      09:02am | 28/10/11

      I agree the world is way too PC now days, which is why I find it fascinating that redhead bashing is condoned by mainstream media just as much as the general public.
      I’m a big boy, I can look after myself but the constant stories coming out of schools is disgusting. You use the word ‘ranga’, you’re just having a bit of fun, you’re not going out to hurt anyone right? Well it doesn’t work like that when you encourage a word that’s only purpose is derogatory.
      Can you imagine the outcry if dozens, maybe hundreds, of schools picked out the black kids called them niggers and physically abused them? Just because the word is ranga is newer doesn’t mean the end result is any different.

    • Kheiron says:

      10:04am | 29/10/11

      And there are a good number of blondes who’ll arc up over those jokes, too.

      In any case, I’ve been a redhead for 26 years now, and it’s only been recently (with Gillards reign) that the issues surrounding my hair colour have made it to the media. Maybe with the election of a blonde bimbo to the top spot we’ll see people getting all narky about blonde jokes too.

      Incidentally, I dont think this increased media attention is to rangas benefit. You may as well grab a bullhorn and say “Redheads are a sensitive lot and here’s some names to call them…”

      Personally, I don’t mind Ranga.

    • EM says:

      09:58am | 28/10/11

      What I find weird is people saying we shouldn’t make fun of redheads yet blond jokes have been the norm for generations.

      It’s a strange society we live in, that’s for sure.

    • alan says:

      08:48am | 28/10/11

      why is it that ONLY the white people can be called racists,BLACK people are never racists.but in my mind the BIGGEST racists are BLACK or coloured people.
      look at obama wife in garden with all black kids and obama himself every think he does is with black people,we have wholely black movies,we see it all the time on t.v. and then there is the black AWARDS then there is that ReoFertinand in football,the big racists the world has seen. are BLACK OR COLOURED PEOPLE,they ARE ALWAYS READY WITH THE RACE CARD.LOOK AT THE CAMBELL WOMAN AT THE AIRPORT.
      if this dont get printed,its because i,m white AND ENGLISH BORN and a racist,  BUT I,M NOT.I EMPLOY 2 ABORIGNALS.

    • James1 says:

      03:44pm | 28/10/11

      I imagine that Trosky would have been very familiar with racism John, having received a bunch of it in his lifetime.  He was, after all, Jewish.  And during the times he lived, Jews copped an awful lot of terrible racism.

      Also, I am pretty sure that racism existed before Trotsky.  Just look at the ways Jews were treated under the Tsar for multiple examples.

    • John says:

      03:18pm | 28/10/11

      This whole racist terms and racism were created by Leon Trotsky Number 2. of Bolshevik Communist movement. These guys had the white Tsar murdered and his white family slaughtered. The communist movements have always been anti-white, anti-nationalism, anti-christian and lead by minority’s. 

      These Communist movements in the west eventually turned in liberal movements, black rights, minority rights, civil rights, martin Luther king rights, Mandela Rights, Obama-Messiah Complex Rights, Feminism, pro immigration, gay marriage, rap music, MTV and pro multiculturalism in the west.

      These Marxists eventually created hate speech laws and the culture of political correctness in order to silence their detractors.

      These political communist types eventually dominated the the media, university’s and the politicians to the point now anti-white sentiment is the culture of today all because of communists movements which were largely anti-white, anti-western, and anti-christian. This is why Darwinist theory is shoved down the throats off the youth today! because Marxist hate of Christianity! This is why minority’s have a voice while white people in their own country don’t.

      These are the tactics of inner party of empowering the minority movements, dividing in order for the inner party to get full control of society. Just have a look at you-tube and read comments on there and you will see how minority’s seem have an extreme anti-white sentiment views, this because of years of marxist brainwashing of prompting anti-white sentiment,  how evil western culture and history is and how Christianity and the crusades were evil. Minority’s are biting into this Marxist propaganda with the hook, line and sinker. anti-white sentiment is a huge problem and the media or politicians have not even raised the issue!

      This is because it’s not in the interest of party! This would hurt the party if they raised the issue. Hopefully a financial collapse, which will end this Marxist order once and for all. In the US they had a white couple who were brutally raped and killed in most sadist manner, and the Marxist mainstream media didn’t even run the story, because the killers were not white!! The Marxists push fictional reality’s, in order control society. Marxism is not about morality, it’s about power, control and enslavement.

      This Marxist movement eventually gave birth to liberalism, far-left politics, leftist politics and even the right follows them. It’s only the Nationalists that reject the entire Marxist influence.  The Nationalists are the only true political will of the western people. The other political movements are foreign and alien to the west. This why we must support people such Ron Paul and the Nationalist Parties in Europe These are the TRUE western parties that represent the western people. The other movements are all controlled by the International Marxist Party and should be rejected by all westerners.

    • buellxb12Ss says:

      11:41am | 28/10/11

      i can see were alan is coming from its only racism if your white just like only men can be sexist.I never see white people in the street yelling racial abuse at aboriginals but could not count the amount of times i have seen them yelling ‘’ ya white c..t ‘’ at people. There favorite and most creative put down for whiteys

    • Chris L says:

      10:36am | 28/10/11

      I especially like the sentences in capitals. It indicates that the opinion being presented is indisputably true…. ‘cause of the capitals…

    • Samuel says:

      10:01am | 28/10/11

      You’ve really got your apostrophes and commas mixed up there, haven’t you!

    • hot tub political machine says:

      09:32am | 28/10/11

      Well played. I genuinely can’t decide whether this is ironic or not. Which TV channel show exclusively black people? ESPN I guess

    • malohi says:

      09:23am | 28/10/11

      Ah satire of a fool. I loved the use of commas in your last sentence.
      So deep.
      I get the metaphor, you will incorporate black text punctuation marks which occupy the lower lines of the print, even against the “proper” usage,
      Just as your satire portrays the view of a person who is satisfied with black persons punctuating society, but still only at the lower level, the narrator in this instance rebelling against his perception of pc or “proper”.

      It was satire right?

    • Anna C says:

      08:34am | 28/10/11

      To badly misquote Voltaire: “I may not agree with your whinge, but I will defend to the death your right to whinge.”

      What’s wrong with whingeing all of a sudden? Isn’t it our favourite national pastime besides sport? Where would it leave us whingers? What would we do with all of our spare time if we were not posting ridiculous comments on the Punch website?

    • Steve says:

      09:53am | 28/10/11

      It’s not the whinging - it’s the new expectation that everyone else will care, and the outrage when they don’t.  The meme of our times is that it is all about ME.

      But we are terrified to be judgemental about others.

      Bring back blunt talking and borderline rudeness!  We would be much more honest with each other as a result.

    • James1 says:

      09:15am | 28/10/11

      Take up crochet, perhaps?  Harangue people on street corners?

    • Watcher says:

      08:25am | 28/10/11

      The term pom just means person of mother England!! Perhaps if they are offended they should sue their parents for not giving birth to them elsewhere. Like it or not Australian’s use slang, probably because we are lazy. I have a good friend from New Zealand ..she calls me a skip, I call her a kiwi both of us just laugh. We need to lighten up a bit

    • Kheiron says:

      05:10pm | 28/10/11

      LauraBoBaura, you actually got away with calling them blackfellas?
      I’ve worked with a lot of Aboriginals in my time and I can guarantee you I’d have been fired, and likely sued, if I said that. Hell, I got threatened for asking why, out of 5 of them between the ages of 25 and 50, not one of them had a drivers license…

      Makes the point quite clearly though, doesn’t it?
      It’s only offensive if you choose to take it as such.

    • James1 says:

      01:16pm | 28/10/11

      The offense arose mostly because said whitefellas were offered up as the cause of every Aboriginal problem.  So while it is certainly reductionist, my wife was offended because she was born in Germany, and has had nothing to do with causing any Aborigine’s problem.  She had, in essence, become a target for hatred and blame simple due to her racial origins.  And my dear wife gets quite upset about racism, wherever she finds it.

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      12:37pm | 28/10/11

      I’m at a loss to how your wife was offended by ‘whitefellas’  in the first place. Is it honestly that offensive? I lived in an indigenous community where the aboriginals called us whitefellas & we called them blackfellas.. no offense was ever taken, despite it being reductionist.

    • marley says:

      10:58am | 28/10/11

      @Anubis - I was under the impression that, for the Brits, the wogs started at Calais.

    • Anubis says:

      10:30am | 28/10/11

      @ Blackadder - They are Italian, the term wogs does not apply. it is derived from the phrase Whinging Old Greek.

    • James1 says:

      10:27am | 28/10/11

      It’s not so much the terminology, but the double standard that bothers me.  It’s a one way street, where unintended offense is acceptable in one direction and thus not in need of fixing, and racism that must be eliminated in the other direction.  Can’t we all just be unintentionally offensive together?

      Also, I don’t like Caucasian because I am not from the Caucasus.  In any case, I believe that Caucasians prefer to be called Armenians and Georgians…

    • EM says:

      10:11am | 28/10/11

      Agree with James, caucasian would be a more fitting generalisation - or IC1 if they want.

    • James1 says:

      09:36am | 28/10/11

      My wife is currently studying to be a nurse.  They have to do a course on the health of indigenous Australians.  As a part of the course, they get a series of lectures from indigenous academics and activists.  All of them lump all non-Aboriginal Australians together as “whitefellas”.  My wife raised that to her, this is an offensive term.  The tutor said that she prefers the term Anglos.  My wife said this is also offensive, as it assumes we are all from England and is highly reductionist.  The tutor replied that no white Australian really cares about their ancestry to the extent that Aborigines do.  My wife raised me - saying I would be terribly offended by being called an Anglo (I’m 100% Irish blood).  The tutor responded that my wife needs to “take the offense out, because it is not mean to be offensive or reductionist”.

      A few weeks later, they received a lecture on how it is offensive to assume all Aborigines are the same.  Apparently we are being reductionist when we refer to them as being a single people, and should be careful to recognise the differences between tribes and regions.  But only if you are Aboriginal.  No need to bother not being reductionist for Australians of Irish, British, Greek, Italian, Serbian, Arab, Lebanese, or any other desent.  We’re just “whitefellas”.

    • Blackadder says:

      09:09am | 28/10/11

      A good mate of mine is Italian. Was even best man at his wedding. His brother and his brother’s friends, however, always referred to me as “skip” behind my back. I found it highly offensive. But, interestingly, in 20 years of being mates with him,  I’ve never once referred to him or his family as “wogs”, as personally I find that term derogatory, and they are wonderful people. To me, it all depends on the context of the reference, as to whether offense should be taken. Said with a smile, and we all laugh. But said with spite and a snarl, and offence may be taken.

    • MarkS says:

      08:06am | 28/10/11

      This article is offensive in the manner that it belittles overly sensitive nut jobs.

    • persephone says:

      07:56am | 28/10/11

      Penbo begins the article by saying that what he is describing is a modern phenomena.

      Sorry, but I can vividly remember a time when the government of Australia banned books like ‘Portnoy’s Complaint’ .

      In a free society, people have the right to be offensive, yes; but the opposite side of that coin is that people have the right to be offended, and to say so.

      Apparently, your idea of a free society is one where anyone can say or do anything they like and no one’s allowed to complain about it.

      And a correction: the French were not fined for responding to the Haka. They were fined for crossing the centre line. They could have responded all they wanted to without fear if they hadn’t done that (although I still think it sucks!)

    • Unionist says:

      06:45pm | 29/10/11

      persephone says:08:56am “And a correction: the French were not fined for responding to the Haka. They were fined for crossing the centre line. They could have responded all they wanted to without fear if they hadn’t done that (although I still think it sucks!)”

      Yeah weird how the author tried to make it an All Black thing. I see he also forgot to mention they (the All Blacks) were not offended. But I guess it was sour grapes at being kicked in the semi’s : ) nothing like beating a sore loser aussie.

    • Bev says:

      12:39pm | 28/10/11

      I would have called that censorship not PC in my eyes to different things.

    • Samuel says:

      10:14am | 28/10/11

      Sure, you have a right to be offended and you have a right to complain about it. But should you be allowed to prosecute someone for offending you?

      If you’ve been threatened with harm, that’s a different matter, but I don’t think you should be allowed to use the law to stop people from speaking things you find distasteful.

    • I hate pies says:

      08:53am | 28/10/11

      People have the right to be offensive, but within the contstraints of commone decency and social etiquite. I’m more concern about the degradation of these in our modern society than offensiveness. Put simply, people are becoming ruder, more selfish and more disrespectful of each other as every day passes.

    • reddragon says:

      08:19am | 28/10/11

      Portnoy’s Complaint is a book? Sh@t, what are these tablets for then?

    • Tim says:

      08:08am | 28/10/11

      No,
      you’re are allowed to be offended and complain about anything.

      Then you can be offended again when told to F**k off.

    • Tim says:

      07:53am | 28/10/11

      The real issue with this article is the fact that people are actually still buying physical porn.

      Seriously, does the internet know you’re cheating on it?

    • Emma says:

      07:50am | 28/10/11

      PC has gone beyond the point of ridiculous! Well written article articulating exactly how pathetic and easily offended some whingers are! Toughen up princesses you choose to be offended!

    • Sodapoppy says:

      12:47pm | 28/10/11

      When the government allowed, yea, encouraged, witless, dull, lo-so individuals to partake of University education, putting them under the spell of loopy academics, we became neighbours of petty thin-skinned navel-gazing, humourless dullards. Please leave us alone and get a life somewhere else you factory rejects!

    • Max Power says:

      07:49am | 28/10/11

      Australians need to harden the fuck up. It is only words and if words offend you or your find words offensive, well, take two desert spoons of cement and harden up.
      This is the problem with modern day society, those who find things offensive and bang on about political correctness, back in the day, when people had to fend for themselves and couldn’t rely on the protection of those that offend them, would have perished.
      Now the weak thrive, mostly off the protection afforded to them by those who offend them,  breed more politcally correct do gooders, who then go to school to be educated in a politcally correct manner, who grow up to be offended by even more things.
      Political Correctness is nothing more than a veil for cowardice people too scared, too afraid or too stupid to have an opinion which might go against the majority, or what the do gooders preceeding them have deemed to be socially acceptable.
      Those who are politcal correct, are more than likely the same people who want a nanny state, where there is no responsibility for your own actions. They are the ones who want things banned because they don’t like doing something. They are the ones who want money they haven’t earnt through wealth redistribution. They are the ones who are generally weak in mind and body, so they want the playing field levelled so they can feel stong and important.

    • Bev says:

      12:36pm | 28/10/11

      Ol’Wobbly says:10:10am | 28/10/11

      How many guns in your closet Max?

      How do you know that?  You don’t do you.  Attack his arguments not him.
      Don’t agree with you then he must be a racist, xenophob and a redneck.  Rednecks love guns and have a zillion of them and are just waiting to turn them on ...........  PC thinking at it best.

      Is not that what this article is about?
      As an exersise where did the term redneck come from?

    • Ol'Wobbly says:

      09:10am | 28/10/11

      How many guns in your closet Max? Do you take one or two to meetings of Katter’s Party?

    • VVS says:

      08:54am | 28/10/11

      I love you Max Power… I’m sorry, I mean Mr Power xoxoxo

      There’s 3 ways to do things - the right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way.
      Isn’t that the wrong way?
      Yes, only faster!

    • John says:

      07:46am | 28/10/11

      Racial Discrimination is about outlawing freedom of speech. It’s a law to protect the wicked races, to stop all criticism of certain wicked races.

      So if i was to say that a certain race has surpassed their criminal quota in this country? If i mentioned the race? That would offend and humiliate them? and i would be thrown in jail? for stating the TRUTH? So the TRUTH gets thrown in jail???

    • Bev says:

      12:27pm | 28/10/11

      Not True. says:12:52pm | 28/10/11

      Just so true.

    • Not True. says:

      11:52am | 28/10/11

      @PsychoHyena - “Let’s face it quite often a white-European male can perform the exact same crime as a non-white-European male and will receive a lighter consequence”
      I actually have to disagree with you there. I’ve lived in the NT all my life and worked for years in the court system and I’v seen many, many “white european males” receive harsh court penalties for offences that those of indigenous race get a slap on the hand for. Even the justice system is too scared to be seen as un-PC.

    • PsychoHyena says:

      09:43am | 28/10/11

      There’s a criminal quota? Wow never heard that before, guess we had better start encouraging more crime then so that the other races can reach their quota.

      Let’s face it quite often a white-European male can perform the exact same crime as a non-white-European male and will receive a lighter consequence. This is why your supposed criminal quota is so much higher for Indigenous Australians. There, not so hard is it? Considering that it’s recognised that a larger percentage by population of Indigenous Australians are incarcerated and there have been many reports on this fact, I can’t see where the problem is with being open and honest about it.

      As for whether they have the higher criminal percentage, I doubt it. If you were to look at the various laws around Australia you would find that non-Indigenous Australians actually break the law more often and readily than Indigenous Australians.

    • malohi says:

      07:59am | 28/10/11

      Can you name a person that was thrown in jail for such things in this country?

      Does putting the truth in capitals make it truer?

      Did you mean “wicked races” or were you referring to the 60s cartoon “wacky races” with mutley. If the latter I hope that this outlawing of criticism is overturned soon. The animation was terrible.

    • Fiddler says:

      07:15am | 28/10/11

      I enjoy offending people, it makes me smile on the inside. The more people get upset the happier it makes me. It just gets easier and easier each year. Seriously why do customs bother seizing porn (unless it’s kiddie porn) a quick look at redtube, youporn, pornhub, youjizz will give you all the midgets, amputees and big feet you could possibly want

    • Borderer says:

      10:31am | 28/10/11

      Apparently I can’t be offended, I’m white, male, christian (sort of), average height and build, educated, healthy, work for a living and of english extraction. All the ills of the world shall be blamed on me, its a wonder the PC police just don’t shoot me in the street….
      I love bluntly tearing strips off self gratifiers who make an issue out of everything. Being you know, white, male etc. its expected so I may as well enjoy it.

    • Zeus says:

      09:00am | 28/10/11

      What about toe sucking, or necrophilia - where can I get them ??? Or Ranga does Dallas ???

    • Anne71 says:

      08:29am | 28/10/11

      My word, my fellow Punchers have some interesting hobbies!

    • reddragon says:

      08:01am | 28/10/11

      @ Fiddler, “redtube, youporn, pornhub, youjizz”? It is great when Punchers put themselves out, do research and actually cite the references.

      It’s a pity that work blocks these sites (or so I’m told)..

      Midgets, amputees AND big feet you say? Not feeling well, have to go home for a, um, rest.

    • Tim says:

      07:47am | 28/10/11

      Agreed,
      I know it’s blatant trolling but sometimes I just can’t help myself from writing stuff that I know will send some people crazy with offence.

    • RC Henry says:

      07:13am | 28/10/11

      People need to lighten up a bit and get over these type fetishes ... life is too short to worry about who said what. I get called a “white c^&%t two or three times a month and I really don’t give a rat’s. If i did I’d be a nut case.

      Good article David. Keep giving it to them.

    • Woff says:

      08:17am | 28/10/11

      “life is too short”

      Not only life it seems… some people too.

      I wonder if the dwarf porn was banned for its content or its titles?

    • Mahhrat says:

      06:33am | 28/10/11

      Well put, if a little petulant.

      Here is a proposition:

      You do not have the right to not be offended.

      Discuss.

    • Kheiron says:

      09:23am | 29/10/11

      malohi, I understand your intent. Trust me, you can’t have a debate on the internet without someone bringing up an extremely exaggerated and barely relevant example to try and prove their point. You get use to it.

      I don’t think I, nor Eric, were trying to make the claim Freedom of Speech should be without restriction. From my reading, Eric was viewing the Racial Discrimination Act as encroaching on his right to free speech and, since Freedom of Speech doesn’t cover threats or inciting to violence but still covers a person for merely being offensive, I’d say he’s right.

      As such, providing examples such as yours, which are neither relevant to the law or Eric’s post are at best a waste of time.

    • malohi says:

      05:15pm | 28/10/11

      @ Kheiron
      It was an example to see whether you believe in true “free speech” or whether what you mean is free speech within the limits which are set. It was a more extreme example to illustrate a point, get it?

      The example was used to show that although one can self righteously beat their chest, wave their american flag and yell “free speech,” society still necessarily imposes limits on what you can say. It is a balancing act.

    • Kheiron says:

      04:54pm | 28/10/11

      malohi, inciting to commit actual crimes, especially ones at the level of murder, are just a step passed simple ‘offence’, don’t you think?
      Or do you really consider urging genocide and rape to be on par with calling some dude a coon?

    • Chris_D says:

      01:11pm | 28/10/11

      @malhoi, thanks, yes, I over-edited and didn’t proof read.  The “irony” was meant to be in those claiming offence to be the ones actually causing the offence.  Such as to call someone an idiot, when in fact you are the idio… oops… wink

    • Mahhrat says:

      12:59pm | 28/10/11

      @I hate pies,

      Absolutely correct, which is why I look to the intent of the piece.

      Now, given we’re not sitting at a pub and I can’t read your body language, I need to judge the words written.

      Sure, I rant, I wasn’t concerned about that, but about the need to undermine a person’s stated identity.

      After all, my online name is Mahhrat.  Given the amount of time I appear to spend on here, I would suggest that this names means very nearly as much to me as the one my mum gave me, and the latter only wins out because I love my mum to bits.

      At the risk of TL;DRing, the reason I’m particular about names related to mum.  She originally wanted a son named Christopher.  Unfortunately, my surname has European origins and is quite long and can be difficult to pronounce.

      As a result, she kept my birth name simple, one syllable with four letters.  I really appreciated that foresight from her - which is why I like Mahhrat: easy, one word, etc.

      That’s led me to the belief that disrespecting a name is low blow territory.  That I’m offended by it, however, doesn’t mean you should be punished any further than to have to read my rants about it smile

    • malohi says:

      11:59am | 28/10/11

      @Chris D. I don’t see the irony.
      Explain yourself or refrain from using that word, lest you seem like an idio….
      oh wait now I see it.

    • Chris_D says:

      11:10am | 28/10/11

      Lets take a look at a few of the comments above as reference. if you call someone an idiot, but they are not, why would the intended insultee be offended? the irony is that to call someone an idiot, who in fact is an idiot, should have no right or reason to be offended if you are merely stating a fact.

      Another example would be that I find it offensive when morbidly obese people expose their rolls of fat to my eyes, yet if I was to make mention of this to them they would be the ones who are offended. However, no one is banning them from the beach and I have no right to infringe on their choice to offend me.

    • I hate pies says:

      10:33am | 28/10/11

      @ Mahhrat; neither did I. I said that the line between what may or may not be deemed offensive to someone is no longer clear. This has resulted in a western culture that is afraid of debating sensitive topics, which is unfortunately detrimental to certain causes and is changing the society in which we live for the worse.
      We live in a society that takes offense to words, rather than looking introspectively to question whether those words have any merit.
      Offense is a choice, and is subjective and contextual; for example, if you had chosen to take an introspective view of my play on words on your name you may have seen them in the context of your many, many posts on this forum and come to the conclusion that the dig was in fact in related to your activity on the punch, not intended to attack you personally.
      Assuming Mahhrat isn’t your real name, I haven’t attacked your real identity at all.
      Do you see the irony in the “offensive and disrespectful idiot” line? Calling me an idiot is an attack on my identity which is incredibly disrespectful, but I take no offense because I’m comfortable with my intelligence and identity. It’s symptomatic of the anonymity of the forum we are using; you wouldn’t call me that to my face because it’s offensive.

    • Mahhrat says:

      09:39am | 28/10/11

      @I hate pies:  Note that I didn’t say you weren’t allowed to be offended by things, I’ve said here and elsewhere that you don’t have the right NOT to be offended.

      I think misusing someone’s name - which is, in a sense, their very identity - incredibly offensive and disrespectful.

      That said, if you want to be an offensive and disrespectful idiot who plays the man and not the ball, then that’s up to you.  I’m not about to report you to some authority for punishment because you do something I don’t like.

      Of course, were you to, say, do a similar thing about my kid in my presence, I’d probably take further action then, but that’s a slightly different bushel of pies.

    • I hate pies says:

      08:48am | 28/10/11

      Our world longer seems to be able to disseminate between what is and what is not offensive. For example, taking the mickey out of someones name…hey Mahhrant

    • marley says:

      08:15am | 28/10/11

      Well, some people do in fact have the right not to be offended.  The Racial Discrimination Act makes that clear.  This right does not apply, however, to the vertically challenged, the intellectually challenged, the mentally ill, the physically disabled, gays, or a host of other categories.  Frankly, I find that pretty offensive in itself.

    • Nilbog says:

      08:15am | 28/10/11

      @ L

      The Racial Discrimination Act says nothing of the sort.

      Just cause section 18C of the Act contains that phrase doesn’t create the blanket right you purport it does.

      It prohibits actions (public actions not private ones) that are reasonably likely to offend etc…

      18D provides exemptions such as art, genuine public debate and public interest publishing.

      You will no doubt be aware that the Act does not apply to religion, so you can be offended in that respect.

      If there was such a blanket right as you suggest, what do make of shows such as Q&A, where guests regularly claim offense? Or viewers who are offended by comments?

      No thanks necessary, just in future leave the legal statements to the lawyers.

      Peace out.

    • short black (its a drink not a physical descriptio says:

      08:02am | 28/10/11

      @Eric the red
      I agree with everything you say - almost - just not the bit offending us Latte sippers.

    • malohi says:

      07:53am | 28/10/11

      @ L.
      Please do not hurt your head trying to interpret the law. pro tip; read the whole section, read it in context.

      @ Eric I assume you are comfortable with a cleric standing in the streets of sydney insighting muslims to kill in the name of allah? Its cool to condone raping of white women in public?
      Or a person standing outside a school in a remote community pontification his hatred for black people for all the kids to hear?

      Do you really believe in true freedom of speech?

    • Tubesteak says:

      07:48am | 28/10/11

      I know I’ve had a good day when I’ve offended someone.

      It’s how I weed out the tossers, wankers, halfwits, morons, nutjobs, losers and freaks that I don’t want to have anything to do with.

      Don’t take that away from me, Mahhrat.

    • Eric The Red says:

      07:22am | 28/10/11

      @L, They can stick the Racial Discrimination Act right up their Bums, My forefathers fought in 2 world wars to gave me the right of free speech and I also served my country and If I want to say something without fear of being hit with a fine I will. We have become a bloody soft bunch of pricks us Aussies. Get over yourselves and go have another latte.

    • Chris_D says:

      07:20am | 28/10/11

      @Mahhrat, I agree with this.  For some reason people think they have a right to NOT be offended at any time.

      Strangely no one jumps to attention to defend theirs or others right not to be embarrassed, for example, which I think is far more insulting and damaging to the persons ego and pysche than being “offended”.

    • L. says:

      07:00am | 28/10/11

      “You do not have the right to not be offended.”

      Actually… you do.

      It’s in the racial discrimination act. It actually says that you have the right not ot be offended.

      “the Racial Discrimination Act makes it unlawful to insult, humiliate, offend or ...”

    • Super D says:

      06:30am | 28/10/11

      Well said.  Its got to the point where you can’t even say someone is carrying on like a pork chop for fear they might be Jewish, Muslim or vegetarian.

    • Johnno says:

      08:23am | 28/10/11

      What a load of crap. When has this ever happened? “I know a guy who met a bloke whose wife knew a man who said that and then a jewish person complained and then he got taken to the Hague and tried for war-crimes!’ It’s political correctness on maaaaaaaaaadddddddddd!

      Wipe your chin and calm down.

    • Johnno says:

      08:23am | 28/10/11

      What a load of crap. When has this ever happened? “I know a guy who met a bloke whose wife knew a man who said that and then a jewish person complained and then he got taken to the Hague and tried for war-crimes!’ It’s political correctness on maaaaaaaaaadddddddddd!

      Wipe your chin and calm down.

    • Ghost says:

      06:21am | 28/10/11

      You do realise that sites like this one not only encourage whinging, but survive on it?  Without your fertilisation you might well be out of a job.  Surprised your don’t see how ‘obvious’ that is and how hypocritical it is to complain about whingers.

    • Mahhrat says:

      08:05am | 28/10/11

      @Ghost, I don’t see why they should.  I can complain about a thing that doesn’t offend me.

      I think Tony Abbot would be a shockingly bad leader for this country - worse even than Bob Brown.  I think he’s chauvanistic, out of touch, greedy and lacks discipline.

      But he doesn’t “offend” me, because the man is a successful and intelligent businessman and he’s allowed to be different to me!

      The thing with “taking offense” is that it’s always things different to you.  Offense is a very selfish viewpoint, because it invalidates the freedom that allows you not to like something.

      It’s ultimately self-defeating and is only a reflection on the person being offended.

      As with all generalisations, those above have their limits - usually when they negatively affect the innocent in society.  There is a balance to be struck between the right to free expression and the need to protect our society.  That need does not encompass each individual’s tiny world.  It’s sensible controls for the greater good taken to an illogical extreme

    • Ghost says:

      07:36am | 28/10/11

      One facilitates the other Mahhrat, no?

    • Mahhrat says:

      07:08am | 28/10/11

      Ghost, there is a vast difference between complaining about a thing and being offended by a thing.

      I hate the crap that most of the politically divided spout on here day after day, and sometimes I even complain about it.  I’m not offended by it though, unless I judge that it was said with the purpose of being offensive, in which case I simply ignore it.

      Haters gonna hate.  Now get back to work; there’s a good lad.

    • Ghost says:

      06:15am | 28/10/11

      ‘well, that’s my weekend buggered’ - no pun intended.

    • Natty says:

      01:29pm | 28/10/11

      Priceless, when I read that I really did PMSL! What a column and what a wit.

    • VVS says:

      08:30am | 28/10/11

      The Midget Mania series is widely available online… and hilarious I must add.

    • scubasteve says:

      08:21am | 28/10/11

      bastards… apologies to real bastards.

    • Brian Taylor says:

      06:15am | 28/10/11

      while certain reporters for the punch and I don’t see eye to eye on a lot of things, I do have to thank them for printing my views (ant, thats for you mate)
      I may not always be right with my views to some people, but none the less they are my views.
      being PC these days really gets up my bloody nose.
      who the hell do these nannies think they are?
      One thing I’ve never worried about and thats expressing my point of view, if someone doesn’t like it, tough titties.
      I don’t always agree with Ant, but I’d fight tooth and nail for his right to express them, as I’d fight tooth and nail to express mine.
      Andrew Bolt has views that a lot of people don’t agree with, well, the public have the right to express their views on what he has to say.
      after all thats what comments sections are all about.
      to all you arseholes who want a nanny state piss off to an Island somewhere and create your own little state and be as happy as a pig in shit living there, but leave the rest of us alone.

    • Mark says:

      09:25am | 29/10/11

      Amen Kheiron- Persephone, seriously, you’re the one this article is referring to. All you need is to have conviction in your beliefs, whatever they are. If you are offended by an opposing opinion then maybe you haven’t given enough thought to your own opinion. After all, if someone is personally attacking your set of beliefs, you’ve won. You can’t completely shut out any viewpoint if you hope to one day attain wisdom.

    • Kheiron says:

      04:02pm | 28/10/11

      persephone, they certainly have the right to express their views, even ones in contrast with the views of others, but that’s not what they do, is it?
      They bitch and moan and complain until expressing a view in contrast with their ‘morally supreme’ opinion is an arrestable offence…and then turn into sarcastic twats when told to piss off to an island.

      ...and 90% of them are people who can never claim to be the target of the ‘offence’. They just go out of their way to be morally outraged on other people’s behalf so they can look about their circle of equally anal friends and feel a step above them.

      Personally, I feel I should be able to call it like I see it and as I see it, you’re a bit of a dick…

    • Markus says:

      08:30am | 28/10/11

      Pers, I don’t it’s so much people taking issue with being told they are wrong or their views are idiotic (nobody would be happy about it, obviously, but will get over it), but when journos/politicians/anyone publicly proclaims that someone has ‘no right’ to think or believe a particular point of view, or accuse that view of being something that it clearly isn’t (see blatant misuse of the term ‘racist’ for example), that is when people really get disagreeable.

    • MFDVR says:

      08:28am | 28/10/11

      @ pers

      Actually, they don’t have that right at all. But I agree with the nature of the response.

    • persephone says:

      08:04am | 28/10/11

      And if people want to express the point of view that they don’t agree with your point of view, surely they have a right to do that, without being told to piss off to an island somewhere.

      If you can’t tolerate people expressing their concerns, maybe you’re the one who should piss off.

    • rod sexton says:

      06:11am | 28/10/11

      The novelist John Sharpe was more inventive when he referred to a midget as a porg - a person of restricted growth.

    • Emma says:

      10:00am | 31/10/11

      Brilliant, this article made my day.

    • Tanya says:

      10:33am | 28/10/11

      AVD - Arrested Vertical Development.

    • BannedRightWingNutJob says:

      08:50am | 28/10/11

      Bugger banning the importation of Midget Mania (Vols 7 & 8). They probably have vertically challenged pee wees anyway.

      What I object to is the banning of dwarf throwing in pubs. It has led to major job losses in the dwarf community, and the Chief Ranga has not proposed any compensation package to our little people.

      Unless you’re a mining company or power station or a failing green energy company - you get no compensation under her !!!!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter