http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/list/1 EN Sun, 16 Dec 2007 21:48:09 +0000 Sun, 16 Dec 2007 21:48:09 +0000 SE1 Discussion Phorum 5.1.6 600 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81062#msg-81062 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Nick Harding) [/quote]

And I would love not to see ANY newsagent's shelves stocked with vacuous magazines like Hello, OK!, Let's Knit, Prize Quest, Prizes Galore, Vogue Bambini (??), etc.

That should leave Koi Carp Monthly right where I can see it.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81062#msg-81062 Sun, 16 Dec 2007 21:48:09 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81047#msg-81047 forum@london-se1.co.uk (barkyhead) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81047#msg-81047 Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:56:33 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81036#msg-81036 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mro)
Do you realize in this context this is not referring to "coitus, the physical act of love" (in the immortal words of Maud Lebowski) and that you could explain it is like "bloody" or "please" except more direct and less appropriate in all circumstances?

Anyway I've already spent too much time dealing with a non-issue. I genuinely hope that all the diatribes above simply reflect their authors are energetic people, constantly looking to address all sort of issues: big ones (like social injustice, hunger and sexual exploitation) and very minor ones (like swear words on t-shirts and japanese kinky cartoons). I'm actually reaonably unenergetic myself and I'm therefore signing-off.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81036#msg-81036 Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:25:05 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81032#msg-81032 forum@london-se1.co.uk (McQueen)
err ... no they don't. not the children I know anyway, nor a lot of the adults for that matter. and I've been making an active attempt to not say it, although I'll admit to lapsing once this week! it's an ugly and demeaning word, when we have such a beautiful and expressive language at our disposal.

[quote=chukalata]Do you really think that a genuine paedophile would have any interest in these cartoon drawings? [/quote]

probably not, but the creeping sexualisation of children, the blurring of the line between what's acceptable or unacceptable in how children are viewed as sexual beings can - to the mind of a paedophile - give them tacit 'permission' for their motivations.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81032#msg-81032 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 21:33:19 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81030#msg-81030 forum@london-se1.co.uk (McQueen)
It is often very hard to see why Person A would find Thing X offensive when one doesn't find it offensive onself, in the same way as it's hard to understand why some people are squeamish about something that you yourself aren't squeamish about, or have a phobia about something that you yourself aren't scared by.

[b][i]What it boils down to is that people are different, and complicated, and we would all do well to recognise and respect that a little more readily.[/i][/b]

However, surely the issue here is not whether a bag with a swear word on it should be either banned outright or celebrated in the name of free expression (and if you made me choose, I'd back free expression over censorship of any kind: I think there are better, more powerful ways of expressing disapproval of things that should be rightly regarded as abhorrent than censorship).

Rather, the issue is whether the more innocent or sensitive amongst us - whether that's children, or people with particular religious or moral beliefs, or who might find the use of particular words offensive (and let's face it, most of us recognise that the F-word is still taboo for many people) or ... well, anyone really - should be forced to deal with something, according to an agenda being imposed on them by someone else, when a bit of common sense and discretion would mean that EVERYONE could be kept happy and have their particular sensibilities and mores recognised.

In this particular case, I, for one, would not want to have to explain to a child in my care what the F-word means ever, but definitely until I thought they were mature enough to understand it - just like I don't want to have to explain to that child yet what porn is, or rape, or abuse, or paedophilia, or murder. But if the bag's on display discreetly, out of the likely eye line of the child, I WOULDN'T NEED TO (and chances are, I might not notice it either!). It's not about imagining they'll never see, or hear, or even use the word; it is about letting them be children as long as possible.

Places catering for the full cross-section of society*, like the Design Museum, should, by default, be anticipating the potential to cause offence to a good proportion of people with something they sell or display, and give those people a fair chance to avoid it if they want to. I would love to be able to walk into a newsagent's and not see ANY shelves stocked with porn mags, even soft porn of the Nuts/Zoo variety. However, I recognise that some people do want to be able to buy these magazines. SO AT LEAST I KNOW BEFOREHAND WHICH SHELVES NOT TO LOOK AT.

*well, at least in theory ;)

Right, I'll get off my hobby horse now!!]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81030#msg-81030 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 21:08:57 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81029#msg-81029 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Al.W) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81029#msg-81029 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:19:20 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81026#msg-81026 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mro)
I'd also vote for a french bakery in Bermondsey street (this happens to be an obsession of mine)]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81026#msg-81026 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:56:26 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81021#msg-81021 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Ivanhoe) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81021#msg-81021 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:46:49 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81020#msg-81020 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jerry) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81020#msg-81020 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:27:04 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81016#msg-81016 forum@london-se1.co.uk (misskarenwalkerse1)
Well one person's obsenity is another persons art. DH Lawrence was regarded as obsence, now its a classic, and most kids and their parents who attend the D.M would be there for the love of design and art and really not worried if someone gets their frigid closed mind in a twist over a swear word.. FCUK I say.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81016#msg-81016 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:30:16 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81013#msg-81013 forum@london-se1.co.uk (chuckalata)
Why is what I said a non sequitur? I don't see how you can say that those cartoons are somehow pornographic at all - they are drawings. I wasn't being flippant, I actually think that it is slightly ridiculous to think of cartoons as paedophilia. They aren't real. And paedophiles are probably not going to be interested in them - they want the real deal, not drawings.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81013#msg-81013 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:03:33 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81002#msg-81002 forum@london-se1.co.uk (longlaner) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/81002#msg-81002 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:48:45 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80999#msg-80999 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jan the old one) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80999#msg-80999 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:26:14 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80997#msg-80997 forum@london-se1.co.uk (cholmondeley) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80997#msg-80997 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:00:17 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80995#msg-80995 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jan the old one) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80995#msg-80995 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 12:20:55 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80992#msg-80992 forum@london-se1.co.uk (misskarenwalkerse1) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80992#msg-80992 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:42:39 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80990#msg-80990 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Michael Place) Michael]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80990#msg-80990 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:24:46 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80988#msg-80988 forum@london-se1.co.uk (chuckalata) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80988#msg-80988 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:02:38 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80976#msg-80976 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jan the old one)
My daughter from the age of six was an avid reader, sitting in the packed surgery reading a magazine asked me what Inkest was, puzzled I looked at the word ..it was incest..no way could I explain that!

I think we are doing our children no favours in permitting language to be seen displayed over bags, or hearing it all the time on television. That combined with sex and violence desensitises(?) children.

Oh my heavens I sound like Mary Whitehouse,
I used to laugh and think she was misguided now I know she was right.
I believe people should be entitled to live their lives in any way they want and would defend that right. But please behind your own front door!]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80976#msg-80976 Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:45:48 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80964#msg-80964 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jerry) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80964#msg-80964 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:59:37 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80961#msg-80961 forum@london-se1.co.uk (cholmondeley) 1.It's always wrong to 'cry wolf too much.'
2.Amazon is no arbiter of anything.
3.Asking the Design Museum to desist displaying paedophilic material is the opposite to 'summary censorship.'
4.I suppose you mean 'stationery' rather than 'standing still.']]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80961#msg-80961 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:35:41 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80959#msg-80959 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jerry) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80959#msg-80959 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:23:22 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80953#msg-80953 forum@london-se1.co.uk (cholmondeley)
'Gothic Lolita' is a youth-cult in Japan made from combining two other youth groups (guess which ones...). Not seen the book yo0u describe but if it documents a youth culture then why have 'doubts' about it?[/quote]
Disagree. I've seen plenty of manga and am broader-minded than many, but I draw the line at the melding of adult sexual characteristics with depictions of children. In 'Hell Babies' the paedophilic implication is blatant as hell. The Design Museum was wrong to stock it, wrong to ignore my letter. The argument that something "documents a youth culture" carries no weight.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80953#msg-80953 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:28:53 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80948#msg-80948 forum@london-se1.co.uk (roy) Most children 'as has been mentioned, punctuate most of their sentences with Fuck these days.
Rather than targetting the design museum your ire should be better placed at the lack of recycling that is destroying our childrens future.
Also french connection has pretty much taking the shock effect of that word and over used and misspelt it to their use pretty effectively over the last couple of years. A much better target imho.
Lets not use 'Wont someone think of the children' to move to a bland and censorious approach to what is after all a museum.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80948#msg-80948 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:54:45 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80945#msg-80945 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Ivanhoe)
I'm looking forward to seeing a few Loli-Goths in Harajuku this Christmas. I'm also hoping to find a cafe where the waitresses dress up as French Maids though, so that probably makes me a screaming pervert. Right! Off to the Design Museum shop with me ;0)]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80945#msg-80945 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:31:04 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80943#msg-80943 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jonathan K)
"In your mostly excellent shop you are displaying a book called 'Hell Babies' cf http://tinyurl.com/yswlfh .

In my view this book obviously crosses the line into pedophilia. I don't want to get into a boring discussion about artistic freedom. Protecting our children trumps that. Personally I would have doubts about another book you are displaying called Gothic Lolita.

I ask you both to remove the book and reply to this email.

thanks"

The books continued to be displayed for some time.[/quote]


Drifting away from the OP here, but the well-known, stylised drawings, by Junko Mizuno (a woman by the way) have never made me think of paedophilia whatsoever. They are not to my taste, but that's a different matter. The pictures are of all obviously meant to be of women - they all have breasts for start! Japanese manga-style drawing do often use big eyes, innocent looks and what western people may think of as 'child-like' hair-styles but in no way is Mizuno's work paedophilic.

'Gothic Lolita' is a youth-cult in Japan made from combining two other youth groups (guess which ones...). Not seen the book yo0u describe but if it documents a youth culture then why have 'doubts' about it?]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80943#msg-80943 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:24:29 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80942#msg-80942 forum@london-se1.co.uk (cholmondeley)
"In your mostly excellent shop you are displaying a book called 'Hell Babies' cf http://tinyurl.com/yswlfh .

In my view this book obviously crosses the line into pedophilia. I don't want to get into a boring discussion about artistic freedom. Protecting our children trumps that. Personally I would have doubts about another book you are displaying called Gothic Lolita.

I ask you both to remove the book and reply to this email.

thanks"

The books continued to be displayed for some time.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80942#msg-80942 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:59:32 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80941#msg-80941 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Ivanhoe) SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80941#msg-80941 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:56:05 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80940#msg-80940 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Boss St Bloke)
There is no way that "Fishing Recycle" is a swear phrase regardless of the semantics.]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80940#msg-80940 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:37:23 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80939#msg-80939 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Ivanhoe)
If that's the word, then I for one would be complaining to the shop....




....that the punctuation is terrible.

Surely it should read "F***ing RECYCLE!". Without the exclamation mark, it's just a meaningless combination of words. Like the sort of t-shirts you see in Japan that have a random combination of English words. With the excl. mark it's a command, an exhortation, which is surely what's intended?]]> SE1 Discussion http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/1/80932/80939#msg-80939 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:35:00 +0000