Is a peace activist costume offensive?
829112
I think that the IDEA of making or increasing peace is attractive to everybody, but people have different ideas about how it can be done.\n\nA lot of people feel that the reason for the failure of wars like Vietnam or Iraq, is that insufficient troops were applied at an early stage. It's pretty frustrating, when they see such an obvious route to success, to hear all sorts of politicians shilly-shallying about the options. Some citizens will see even the 'hawks' in the government as indecisive and weak, so the idea of 'peaceniks' is just from a different planet!\n\nWorld War Two involved the commitment of ALL forces, and the active support of the ENTIRE population, and plenty of people are nostalgic about those days and about the feelings of national unity that existed. (The usual interpretation of WW2 is that the Allies won; in fact, many historians say that the Axis lost; mainly by disastrously attempting to invade Russia)\n\nThere is also a trend in modern society, to think of 'being duped' as more of a crime than cheating or bullying is. This idea ('don't be a mug!') has always been around, but is becoming more dominant at the moment (for example, new gameshows often focus on 'creative dishonesty' as the route to success). To anybody who supports military intervention, the idea that 'being weak' and 'saying please' can be more effective than applying strong compulsion, can be seen as deeply insulting.\n\nIn the US (with its Pioneer history, and conflict with Britain, and role in the Cold War) sensitivity about 'naive' methods of solving problems can be easy to trigger. Colt used to make a revolver called 'The Peacemaker'.\n\nIn families, disagreements over these kinds of principled matters can last for generations, and are very difficult to resolve. There may not be a solution that does not involve one side 'giving in' to the other's argument. Even if this happened, the 'victorious' side can still harbour a suspicion that the 'defeated' party is shamming.\n\nIt may be that all you can do is keep talking to them, and bearing their lack of grace, in the hope that a message of family unity may be slowly getting through.
144345
I think it is the definition if irony. The Muslums are upset over the depiction of their prophet with a bomb for a turban and they then commit terrorist acts. They are provint the cartoon to be accurate. Have you seen any other religion act like this? Look at all of the bad depictions of Jesus there are. Do christians go around threatening violence?
1034703
Yes, you should. And while you're at it you should protest against those dirty perverts who dress using mixed fabrics
1111734
Yes and no; over the short term, it would cause the retailer to have to order more furs, but long term, if activists kept doing it, it could become expensive enough that the retailer would think twice about selling it -- buying merchandise you can't sell isn't good business practice.\n\nThe same tactic has also been used against private citizens; activists would wait near big public events where they know that ritzy folks will probably walk through wearin furs and then douse them with either paint or something looking like blood.
327057
It would depend on the context it was being used in.  I could not stand up with someone if I did not believe in the cause that they are supporting.
578733
although uniforms are put in place to protect poorer students from ridicule based on their lack of designer clothes or recent trends, in my experience this fails...miserably\n\neven though everyone has the same uniform, people can still incorporate designer wear into it...for example black trousers and black shoes, to most at my school, means black Armani jeans and prada shoes...the bags are designer too and often the coats. even though there is a uniform it is still clear who has money and who doesn't...so this argument is null and void\n\nto add to this i find it disturbing that individuality is crushed and freedom of expression through ones clothing is prevented. We should not be encouraged to follow the crowd or become a militant cloned like society!\n\nanyone who values freedom and individuality would oppose uniform.
623098
Every country has their own social customs associated with clothing and attire. Whenever you wear something against the local social norm you will be met with confusion, rebellion, sometimes even anger. \nI say it's only bad to wear if you have a hairy butt.
185254
It isn't offensive to wear orange and green together, in Ireland we dont do the whole wearing green on Paddy's day that America seems to do. Im catholic and living in Dublin but I would not find it offensive if i saw someone wearing orange/green or both together. Its true about the green on the flag standing for the Republic and the Orange standing for the North of Ireland, but Ireland these days has mostly gotten over the divison now. Wear both colours on Paddy's day if you want. \nAnd don't worry, you are offending no-one. Personally though - orange and green together just do not look good.
960844
If you use it in a racial overtone....or threat.\nBut if you are using it as a statement in the mix of joking around...I see no harm..but the fine line is not using as a joke by using a specific race in the joke.\nIt really depends on the person....recieving the word....some people are so sensitive it's pitful.
150971
They did show one briefly on televion it was slightly blurred around the cartoon's face but it was easy to see it was an middle eastern looking man or dark skinned man in a white rob with his hands somewhat together possibly in a prayer like postion and what looked like a simple yellow halo over his head in an all white background. \nI don't think it's how he was depicted just the fact that he was depicted at all. Some believe that the peaceful protestest were incited by an extremist group. But all in all it's a matter of how the media decides to take the information and spin it out for it's own gain. \nOther religions are depicted in unholy manners all the time and the media barely picks up on it or it's protesters. It's a means of timing meets opportunity for public media gain.
296300
I disagree vehemently with those who have already posted their replies.  Mascots that purport to "honor" Native folks are not considered by the Native people they "represent" to be honorable at all.  (Take a look at the Cleveland Indians baseball cap and tell me if you think it's honoring anyone.) It's mockery.  Blatant racist mockery.  My colleague Charlene Teters has a great illustration of this issue on this website:\nhttp://www.aics.org/NCRSM/index.htm\n\nThe fact is that this country, from its very beginnings, was founded on exterminating, or assimilating, or otherwise eliminating Native people.  The fact that sports teams and non-Native fans say that these offensive stereotypes are "all in good fun" or "meant to be respectful" or simply "a tradition," doesn't take away (or even show an awareness of!) the history of racism and oppression against the Native peoples of this country. \n\nDo we name teams "the Alabama Darkies" or "The New York Jewboys?"  No, we don't, even though those racist terms are part of American history.  Why, then, do people still think "Redskins" is acceptable?  "Redskin" is precisely analogous to the N-word as applied to African-Americans.\n\nThese so-called "traditions" are merely direct reflections and symptoms of the American tradition of cultural genocide against Native peoples.  And these "long-standing traditions" are usually very recent phenomena, at most, 100 or so years old.  Ask any Native person if anything only 100 years old is a "tradition."  For Native folks, that's an INNOVATION.\n\nAnd one more thing: the children.  Native peoples in the US today have a hard enough time teaching their children to be proud of their heritage and identity when they are, in many nations, surrounded by poverty, unemployment, and various social ills.  These depictions are yet another means by which Native kids are made to feel bad about themselves.  If the US was a country that really cared about its children, it would stop this practice immediately, on every level.\n\nAs a society, we have progressed in that we no longer accept racist cartoons of Asian peoples and African peoples in our mainstream culture.  It's long past time that we eliminate these outdated racist practices in regard to Native peoples.\n\nAnyway, that's my opinion.\n\nSee the website below and scroll down to "statements and essays."  You'll get some really great information.
526863
nope i dont think its offensive
1136220
yes it does, SIA costume.Seriously, foreigners can tell you're Sporean if you wear that.
578186
Yes. I am sick of judges saying you can't wear a shirt that might hurt someones feelings (the kid in CA who got in trouble for wearing an anti-gay shirt). Are we turning into wusses? What about all those people who wear anti-war or anti-American shirts. I don't like 'em, but I'm not crying to some judge.
955518
I really don't care if people crossdress or not--it it's their thing, then I don't see that I should criticize.  That being said, there are societal norms.  I don't believe those societal norms are always fair, or right, but still they exist and it is expected that people conform to them.  However, crossdressing is pretty harmless, and I think it's a pity that more people aren't tolerant of it.
717778
personally, it doesn't bother me, if you're taking a poll of answers.\n\nhowever, it can be VERY offensive to other people.  i would suggest trying a new saying on for size.  like "holy cow", or "oh my gosh", or "for pete's sake"\nor come up with your own...i used to say "oh my god" alot and then i went into management and realized i needed a new phrase, so i do "oh my gosh" or "oh my goodness", or if it's bad i say "crud bucket" instead of "sh it" or "hell".
132435
Yeah is probably offensive to some pro-choicers but abortion is offensive to me. So I will stop wearing my t-shirt when they stop defending the right to kill innocent babies.\n In my opinion as far as abortion is concerned political correctness does not apply..