It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Banning the word 'fatty' is an insidious attempt at politically correct thought control

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

sure take my words out of context, fail to even credit my words so i might not even see it, and have a moral diatribe.
can i take the abuse back? said abuse being wordplay and vocabulary? yes indeed

you know why, and i can only speak for myself but i feel that when one has endured not only verbal, but psychological and physical abuse. you have two choices: submit to it or stand up and empower yourself.

and you know what? i'll be damned if i will let anyone's words hurt me, words? name calling? verbal abuse?
they bounce right back, i only dish out what i can deal with, i'm fair not being a hypocrite.

because you know what really hurts people? actions do

and what's the topic here? criminalization of the spoken word, and sorry but i won't stand for that
that's a step closer to having our thoughts made a criminal offense aswell.

a so called dictator once said something i agree with: "unlimited freedoms will always destroy themselves"
you know why that's actually correct?

you should never have the freedom to oppress, restrict or control freedom itself.
but words? words are vehicles we use to convey thoughts ideas and opinions.

and as far as i'm concerned mere words never oppressed, restricted or controlled my freedom.

actions taken upon words spoken have, but that's not the topic of this thread.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by ollncasino

Calling someone a fatty is no different to making some kind of racist comment. I welcome such changes in society. I hope to see the rest of the world follow.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:12 PM
Okay, but a person should be allowed to react in self defense if somebody comes up to them and starts abusing them for no reason.

i'm sorry, but it's just wrong to say a person can be abused and they have sit there and take it.

It's a bunch of crap.

If you want the ability to abuse someone, a person should have the ability to fight back.

Pure and simple.

Any other way is a double standard.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:13 PM
Well, I most certainly consider people who use demeaning and cruel words directed against overweight people to be conducting HATE CRIMES. So, if children are incapable of gaining the hints and problem solving on their own, sometimes a parent figure needs to lay down some rules. Even, though I consider our gov a corrupt group overall.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:26 PM

Originally posted by Nite_wing
If anybody called me Fatty, I would sit on 'em and crush 'em.

lol. Best thing I've read all day! Thanks!


While I don't agree with calling people "fatty" or any other descriptive name that is intended to be derogatory or hurtful, I also don't agree with infringing on free speech. It's sort of a catch 22 for me.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:32 PM
Dietary intake is only part of the obese equation, genetics is the other part so I am going to pass being "political correct" as to blame the food instead of the person,

The last part of that equation, some people can do everything in the world and sitll be obese.

Banning the word "fatty" is the same as the lame attempts to ban "illegal" in illegal alien.

That stupidity has got to stop.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:33 PM
"Okay, but a person should be allowed to react in self defense if somebody comes up to them and starts abusing them for no reason."

never have i said they couldn't or shouldn't, but don't mix up the issues. if someone verbally abuses me i verbally abuse them, if they physically abuse me i will physically abuse them, and i expect such treatment in return.
please stop advocating and bringing up physical violence when what's up for debate here has nothing to do with with beating people up. can it lead to a physical altercation? yes, and that is already criminalized.
please debate the topic which is criminalization of the word fatty in the united kingdom.

"i'm sorry, but it's just wrong to say a person can be abused and they have sit there and take it."

nobody said they should, they have a mouth to reply back, nobody's is perfect.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:35 PM

Originally posted by badgerprints
Too bad common courtesy is a vague memory in society.
This wouldn't be an issue.

The same people that pushed the idea of no personal boundaries in expression are the same people that now want to impose legal rules on the same.

Great point!. The issue is control and domination. George Orwell was right. Oh he was a socialist interestingly enough, and wrote 1984 based on what he already saw and just added some imagination. But socialism, communism, and fascism all stem from the same leftist ideology. This regulation is Nanny Statism at it's best.I also would like to say that when children are not brought up to respect people in general, the Nanny State sees it ias their job to police the actions of people as a result of bad parenting. The State wants control of the children. Taken even further, the State could take children away from the parents on the premise the parents aren't doing their job. We may think oh that's outrageous and it will never happen, but I beg to differ. I thnk that is exactly where the world is headed. It's only a piece of the puzzle too.

edit on 13-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:35 PM

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone

It's just wrong to go up to a complete stranger and start berating them for no reason. That is abuse, and should not be allowed.

If I went up to a stranger and started to berate them, I would already be guilty of a public order offense.

Berating a stranger is already not allowed in criminal law.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:43 PM

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone

Isn't this a huge double standard? After all, the only reason to ban these words is because some people's feelings get hurt.

So why is it okay to ban some words so that some people's feelings don't get hurt but not okay to ban others that also hurt other people's feelings?

What you just wrote hurt my feelings. So we should ban the word 'ban', 'hurt', 'feelings', 'people'...?

Laws do not exist to stop people's feeling getting hurt.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 01:52 PM
reply to post by Laykilla

Maybe they should arrest you for calling that poster "not the best reader", as it has pretty much the same implications as "fatty" in that it is an insult to the personal characteristics of a person. "Not the best reader" may be your attempt at pretending you are not as mean as the guy who calls someone fatty, while still throwing out the nicest insult you can think of. See how that works?

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:01 PM

Originally posted by andy06shake
reply to post by ollncasino

"1984 is becoming a reality."

And has been for sometime now, spot on the ball! Well said!!!! It will be thought crimes next me thinks. LoL
edit on 13-10-2012 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)

It seems to me I read something recently about a tech company developing some software that can predict pre-crime thought.....Minority Report is real.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:11 PM
People are hypocrites...

The government says it wants to stop hate speech or words that cause offense...

"Arrgh they are taking away our freedoms, we are losing free speech, we are oppressed"

Muslim man says he wants Sharia law for the west...

"How dear he say that in this country, it shouldn’t be allowed, why does the government allow this?"

Seems that we all want free speech for our own views, and restricted speech for others!


posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:13 PM
Are people seriously mad because they enjoy being a-holes, and this *might* be a speed bump in your road to making yourself feel better by hurting someone else?

Well, we could put a ban on the source of obesity. McDonald's, HERSHEY'S, Mars Inc., Willy Wonka Candy Co., Mckee Foods Corp., etc. Ah, but those are corporations, they won't get touched.

I guess we should make it illegal to not exercise daily, or maybe we should round up all obese people and shoot them? Would that make you happy? Be honest.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:15 PM
reply to post by ollncasino

"Banning the word 'fatty' is an insidious attempt at politically correct thought control"?

Or maybe it's just that some people don't remember how to be polite. And need to be reigned in. Like malicious children, who don't know any better.

Of am I way off base.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:21 PM
One thing that struck a chord with me while reading this thread, is the amount of people that posted with this in mind:

"This is wrong, calling someone Fat, Fatty or Obese should not be a hate crime!"

Then turn right around in the same post and add this statement:

"If they'd just put the fork down once in a while, no one would be calling them that in the first place!"


"If they'd stop snacking all the time or stop stuffing their faces all the time, they wouldn't be fat in the first place."

I'm very astounded to see in these posts, how the posters can be quite intelligent and show how laws against these words are violating freedom of speech, or that they should be able to point out that people need to loose weight for health reasons.
Then turn right around in the same post and make some of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen!

I think instead of making words like "Fat, Fatty or Obese" into hate crimes, what really needs to be happening here is some education about obesity in the first place.

Those of you making these posts are assuming that every obese person you see must be so because they "never put the fork down" or "always stuffing their faces", or "Jeez! That Fatty needs to get up off their butt and do some walking or something! How disgusting!"

Did any of you that think that, ever stop once and ask yourself: "Am I thinking that because it's true? Or are their things about that person I don't know about?"

Obesity can be caused by over eating. Sure. It can also be caused by WHAT you eat, and lack of exercise. It can also be caused by genetics, and medical problems.

My mom, god rest her soul, was a large woman around the waist. Yet she ate like a bird. Normally she would not ever have breakfast, drinking coffee, black instead. Sometimes she would eat lunch, sometimes not. At dinner she would not have huge portions, nor would she go for seconds. More times than not, there was plenty of food that I would scrape off her plate when I would do the dishes.
Yet she was over weight.
So was she lazy? Sitting on her butt all day?
No. That woman would go around and scrub our house down from top to bottom every day.

There was two reasons she was over weight: 1) She wasn't eating enough. That's right, you read that right. On the average, she would eat only one meal, and that was dinner at night. Well after she'd been working hard all day, and only a few hours before bed.
2) She drank. It was whiskey and water, but it was at night she'd have a few drinks before bed. High in calories.

Any professional trainer will tell you that if you do that, even if you don't eat a lot at that one meal, you're going to get fat. Your body thinks you're starving it, so it hoards the food you do eat, and since you are not getting a lot of exercise after that meal, it stores it as fat.

It wasn't because she "couldn't put the fork down". It wasn't because she "stuffs her face all the time", it was because she didn't want more weight, wanted to loose weight, so was not eating a lot, and only one meal, but that one meal was at the wrong time.

But, many of you out there that have posted in this thread would have seen my mom on the street and thought: "Fatty! Put the damn fork down once in a while! Jeez! You must stuff your face all the time!"

I've seen plenty of people that eat three meals a day, but limit how much they eat. But their jobs have them sitting all day. By the time they get home, they don't want to exercise, they want to kick back and relax. So they pack on the pounds. Even though they don't snack, or have HUGE portions during their meals.
Sometimes, they'll start exercising, and they will drop some of the weight, but not a lot. Why?
For many of them it is because of WHAT they eat: foods high in fat and carbs: McDonalds for breakfast, Burger King for lunch, and too tired to cook, so I'll just pick up a Pizza. Even if it's one slice, one small burger, or biscuit, those foods they are eating have them intaking more carbs and cals than they are burning, even with exercise.

I had a friend who was as thin as a stick. She was in a car accident that messed up her back. She was stuck in bed for weeks, and then spend months having to use a walker, then a cane. During that time, her eating habits did not change, yet she packed on 90 pounds. She couldn't exercise. Even after she no longer needed a cane, the most exercise she can do is light walking, and even then she's in pain all the time.

But I guess it's her fault according to many of you, huh? Not the butt head that decided he didn't need to stop at that red light. I mean she's fat, so she MUST be stuffing her face, right?

According to many of you, that's her problem. But then that's because you've ASSUMED something, and decided to judge all people that look that way......even though you may not know the truth.

So again, the problem isn't the words really.....the problem is you're judging someone without really knowing them.
edit on 13-10-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:28 PM
How will Jeremy Clarkson and James May make fun of Americans on Top Gear?

It's ironic than Britons are getting fatter than Americans, but we all have our stereotype crosses to bear.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:32 PM

Originally posted by n00bUK

Originally posted by UziLiberman

totally 1984ish

I was born in 1987, never lived to witness this 1984(ish) witchcraft that people talk of. I'v heard this terminology used several times in the past 2 days and quite frankly, I feel left out on something that is obviously deemed an importance..

Please, enlighten one
If not, this is so 1984

Here let me help ya! You can read the whole book and I will just post a relevant section

Parsons was Winston's fellow-employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralysing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms -- one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the Thought Police, the stability of the Party depended.

'You're a traitor!' yelled the boy. 'You're a thought-criminal! You're a Eurasian spy! I'll shoot you, I'll vaporize you, I'll send you to the salt mines!'
Suddenly they were both leaping round him, shouting 'Traitor!' and 'Thought-criminal!' the little girl imitating her brother in every movement. It was somehow slightly frightening, like the gambolling of tiger cubs which will soon grow up into man-eaters. There was a sort of calculating ferocity in the boy's eye, a quite evident desire to hit or kick Winston and a consciousness of being very nearly big enough to do so. It was a good job it was not a real pistol he was holding, Winston thought.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:38 PM
reply to post by ollncasino

It's strange that new restrictions on what we are allowed to say always come clothed in the disguise of 'protecting' people.

Rather interestingly, it isn't the people supposedly in need of protection who call for further restrictions, but rather third parties who take it upon themselves to be offended for others.

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 02:41 PM

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by ollncasino

"Banning the word 'fatty' is an insidious attempt at politically correct thought control"?

Or maybe it's just that some people don't remember how to be polite. And need to be reigned in. Like malicious children, who don't know any better.

Of am I way off base.

When you start banning words, you end up having to enforce the bans. More people will end up in jail or paying fines. This is the Nanny Staters' way of controlling and engineering society into their vision of Utopia. It is funny that even George Orwell was a socialist and some of the stuff in his book smacks of hatred of Capitalism, and it is hard to tell whether he is commenting on Nazi fascists or communist thugs. One has to realize that all these different ideas stem from a leftist ideology of authoritarian control, whether it be forcing everyone to like gays or arresting people for using the word "fatty". It's all from the same leftist ideology. The Utopian socialists want everything to be all nicey nice, so it is a good idea to read Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism" to understand the Smiley face Nanny Statism. The truth is, there can never be a real society that can achieve such Utopian goals, because to enforce it you end up with "1984".

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in