Benedict Cumberbatch sorry for 'coloured' comment
Discussion
Troubleatmill said:
Spot what? The bit where is says Founded in 1909I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
TTwiggy said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
You beat me to this. Nobody has cried 'I'm offended', a charity has simply pointed out that the term is outdated. For some reason, Cumberbatch has chosen to respond with an essay. Only he knows why. Meanwhile, PH goes into predictable 'PC gone mad, in my day you could call a spade a spade' meltdown.
In short, nothing to see here, move along.
I'm sure you realise how offensive that comment in quotes is.In short, nothing to see here, move along.
Carla Sims, communications director for the NAACP in Washington, D.C., came to Lindsay Lohan’s defense today following Lohan’s on-camera interview with “Access Hollywood” in which Lohan called president-elect Barack Obama “coloured.”
Sims believes that the media’s lambasting of the starlet is only to create controversy.
“Sometimes you have to look at the intent…but the word ‘colored’ isn’t derogatory,” Sims told me in a phone interview. “Clearly she’s [Lohan] an Obama supporter.”
“There’s really no problem with what she said,” Sims said. “In her excitement, she was acknowledging that color was not a barrier in the populace choosing Obama.”
“The term ‘colored’ is not derogatory,” Sims continued. “They chose the word ‘colored’ because it was he most positive description commonly used at that time. It’s outdated and antiquated but not offensive.”
Sims is referring to the founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People that created the organization nearly 100 years ago in support of social justice for African Americans.
Source: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2008/11/12/lohan-...
Sims believes that the media’s lambasting of the starlet is only to create controversy.
“Sometimes you have to look at the intent…but the word ‘colored’ isn’t derogatory,” Sims told me in a phone interview. “Clearly she’s [Lohan] an Obama supporter.”
“There’s really no problem with what she said,” Sims said. “In her excitement, she was acknowledging that color was not a barrier in the populace choosing Obama.”
“The term ‘colored’ is not derogatory,” Sims continued. “They chose the word ‘colored’ because it was he most positive description commonly used at that time. It’s outdated and antiquated but not offensive.”
Sims is referring to the founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People that created the organization nearly 100 years ago in support of social justice for African Americans.
Source: http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2008/11/12/lohan-...
FredClogs said:
Spot what? The bit where is says Founded in 1909
I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
Fred, serious question please.I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
From the above how come it is OK for them to use the 106 year old word but not anyone else? Surely these 'rules' apply to everyone equally?
FredClogs said:
Troubleatmill said:
Spot what? The bit where is says Founded in 1909I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
You beat me to this. Nobody has cried 'I'm offended', a charity has simply pointed out that the term is outdated. For some reason, Cumberbatch has chosen to respond with an essay. Only he knows why. Meanwhile, PH goes into predictable 'PC gone mad, in my day you could call a spade a spade' meltdown.
In short, nothing to see here, move along.
I'm sure you realise how offensive that comment in quotes is.In short, nothing to see here, move along.
You'd be even more offended if you took the time to research what Oscar Wilde meant and the full quote of the "calling a spade a spade" cliche. It's not really a badge to be worn with honour.
FredClogs said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
You beat me to this. Nobody has cried 'I'm offended', a charity has simply pointed out that the term is outdated. For some reason, Cumberbatch has chosen to respond with an essay. Only he knows why. Meanwhile, PH goes into predictable 'PC gone mad, in my day you could call a spade a spade' meltdown.
In short, nothing to see here, move along.
I'm sure you realise how offensive that comment in quotes is.In short, nothing to see here, move along.
You'd be even more offended if you took the time to research what Oscar Wilde meant and the full quote of the "calling a spade a spade" cliche. It's not really a badge to be worn with honour.
Grumfutock said:
FredClogs said:
Spot what? The bit where is says Founded in 1909
I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
Fred, serious question please.I can see why it's so hard for people to "keep up" with all these changes in acceptable language every 106 years...
To be fair they could change their name, like the Spastic Society did when they changed to Scope, but then again why should they have to just because a few idiots refuse to accept 106 years of cultural evolution?
From the above how come it is OK for them to use the 106 year old word but not anyone else? Surely these 'rules' apply to everyone equally?
FredClogs said:
There is an explanation from the Chairperson of the NAACP reported as why they haven't changed the name it's not really for me to explain, civil life is all about rubbing along with other people, unless they're toffs and the privileged elite in which case I think they deserve one in the ribs from time to time.
You really are quite a pleasant chap.FredClogs said:
There is an explanation from the Chairperson of the NAACP reported as why they haven't changed the name it's not really for me to explain, civil life is all about rubbing along with other people, unless they're toffs and the privileged elite in which case I think they deserve one in the ribs from time to time.
Not really what I ask was it. But ho hum.Troubleatmill said:
FredClogs said:
There is an explanation from the Chairperson of the NAACP reported as why they haven't changed the name it's not really for me to explain, civil life is all about rubbing along with other people, unless they're toffs and the privileged elite in which case I think they deserve one in the ribs from time to time.
You really are quite a pleasant chap.FredClogs said:
There is an explanation from the Chairperson of the NAACP reported as why they haven't changed the name it's not really for me to explain, civil life is all about rubbing along with other people, unless they're toffs and the privileged elite in which case I think they deserve one in the ribs from time to time.
Pathetic. TTwiggy said:
FredClogs said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
GadgeS3C said:
TTwiggy said:
You beat me to this. Nobody has cried 'I'm offended', a charity has simply pointed out that the term is outdated. For some reason, Cumberbatch has chosen to respond with an essay. Only he knows why. Meanwhile, PH goes into predictable 'PC gone mad, in my day you could call a spade a spade' meltdown.
In short, nothing to see here, move along.
I'm sure you realise how offensive that comment in quotes is.In short, nothing to see here, move along.
You'd be even more offended if you took the time to research what Oscar Wilde meant and the full quote of the "calling a spade a spade" cliche. It's not really a badge to be worn with honour.
I don't wish to live my life entirely in the manner of Dorian Gray (but I'll bet it's crossed Cumbersnots mind once or twice) but in this matter I think it's more valid than the thinking that a man says what he wants to say and faces up to the consequences.
fblm said:
FredClogs said:
There is an explanation from the Chairperson of the NAACP reported as why they haven't changed the name it's not really for me to explain, civil life is all about rubbing along with other people, unless they're toffs and the privileged elite in which case I think they deserve one in the ribs from time to time.
Pathetic. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff