How pathetic..

its not a derogatory term. it has a traditional british meaning that has nothing to do with gay people..

for example, if i said 'faggots should be burnt' or 'im going to burn a faggot' you would go crazy.. however.. a british person (if they know any history) would get a bundle of sticks and burn them..

the term faggot used in this context is nothing offensive at all.. its only Americanisms which have made it offensive, before it was americanized it was not offensive.. if i said 'im going outside to have a fag' in the US i would get weird looks.. over here, it would just mean that im going out for a smoke..

nothing offensive with using traditional british words in an english song wrote 20 years ago.. there havnt been mass protests about that song for the last 20 years, so why make it an issue now? its just censorship gone mad..
 
i wish they would stop worrying about who they're going to offend and how, and worry more about what we want to hear/see on the radio/tv
 
Yeah, they've been showing that for ages, and its only now they've decided to censor it?
 
I don't think this is outrageous at all.

Homphobic slurs shouldn't be tolerated anywhere, how are homophobic slurs acceptable on a radio station?

i agree, you said it yourself that some find it offensive, and i dont think a christmas song should be saying that kind of stuff.
 
rudster.. read my post..

it is an english christmas song made 20 years ago.. i dont think that modern americainizms should be allowed to apply... it is not offensive in the slight in the tradiotional meaning of the word in english.. just cause americains decided to change what they think the word meant, we shouldnt have our carols changed..
 
Back
Top Bottom