Originally Posted by leelee69:
“I agree there is a difference between freedom of speech and abusiveness but the problem I have is the way abusiveness is promoted unless a certain trigger word is invoked. BB has no issue with anyone being outwardly abusive to any housemate, the whole way noms have been handled this year just prove that, Face to Face is doe purely to get that type of rise. Katie H calling Alicia thick is abusive, Perez provoking Alex is abusive, tbh anyone can be offended by anything and in someways that is the game Perez is playing. He’ll provoke, get the reaction he wants (even smile about it) before going into the diary room to feign tears and demand action. The Ken one is a tricky one for me, the word used is one that although not really PC or current isn’t the’N’ word and was deemed acceptable until recently. This actually provoked a discussion with my 70 year old Mum who was lost for what was acceptable, she is no way racist but thought black was offensive and coloured was the pc correct term!!! I’m not saying Ken didn’t know what he was doing by the way.
For me the censorship is becoming ridiculous, as I say show the thing 24/7, allow people to see people warts and all and judge them, they will be hung by the press, the public and ultimately the hirers. If the sanitisation carries on it will get to the point where no one will be prepared to speak and I suppose it will become the true Orwellian Big Brother”
Agree: I posted a thread akin to this subject as seriously did not know that n*g*oe was an offensive word as one hears African Americans use it. Similarly, was unaware that 'coloured' and 'fag*ot* are unacceptable (knowing that Perez has used the latter term in his blogs). Several FMs, tantamount, accused me of racism and inferred I had a subversive reasons for my post so I conclude that people interpret and twist things in their own minds to find objectivity and then make others feel they are bad people for expressing a query/view - what a sad state of affairs!