What makes material offensive?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
Whether you're reading, watching TV, webbing it up, or tooling around outside, the human world is painted over with messages meant to persuade us of one thing or another, and a lot of this content is aimed specifically at one group of people, without any consideration for others. While Tim James' "English Only" political ad comes to mind, not everything must be so openly hostile to retain a stinging vitriol.

For instance, the target audience of that commercial could easily be offended by the same commercial just by adding Spanish subtitles.

But what about a similar effect accomplished by exclusion, rather than with a distinct purpose? It can hurt and offend just as much. The entire cast of my favorite show, Criminal Minds, is straight, upper middle class, and while there is a token black character, no other ethnicity or culture besides whites and dominant US culture are represented. They have one character who's overweight, and who has a latin last name, but she too is white, cis, and clearly well off. There appears to be no reason for everyone in this particular department of the FBI to be homogeneous, outside of the idea that the producers had only one type of viewer in mind.

I think that by making these characters complicated, they've avoided earning the disinterest of the non-white, non-straight, non-middle class viewer -- but since I'm all of those things, I can't really tell.

I see this "accidental bigotry" as more of a symptom than a cause, but to understand it, I had to find a way to experience it myself. I watched a few hours of BET the other day, and found the same phenomena: characters mostly had a homogenized race (Black) and economic class in the spread of prime-time shows I watched. I learned two things from this: I don't like being excluded, and when I am, I'm not that interested in whatever message a show has. It was really hard not to go do something else, and I can only reason that this is because my type of person wasn't included.

On the flip side, if a show tries to portray the entire rainbow of cultures, orientations, and races, it can come across as pandering, particularly if it is done in improper context, such as having an accepted (for lack of a better term) and openly gay teacher in a 1950s setting, or, in a story set in the same decade, having a black manager in a mixed-color work-place with no explanations as to why the social milieu has changed.

Then there is content that tries to be more inclusive, but in doing so resorts to stereotypes. Gay characters are often presented in a single, one dimensional light that is decidedly not representative of all gays. This probably only offends the straights who are not scathingly homophobic, but when gay character after gay character in movies, films, and books is presented in the flamboyant, colorful, and happy Flame On! stereotype, is it (and shouldn't it be) offensive to gays?

And then--who decides what a stereotype is? The meek white businessman who goes insane and kills his family may be a stereotype, but that sort of person exists. When does this character stop being flat and two dimensional, and start seeming human?

If I take a stereotype and flip the race or gender or orientation -- or all three -- is it still a stereotype? If I portray a white, transgender lesbian character, but start from modifying the horrible stereotype of a black teenage male who skips school and does drugs, has the character magically transformed into someone interesting, just by virtue of changing two intrinsic traits? Or is it still a flat character drawn from a bigoted pool of community content?

Where is the line for you? It surely comes long before the acidic tone of a commercial that acts as though you and your people are garbage, but does it extend into (possibly) accidental exclusion? Do stereotypes or modified stereotypes make you angry? When does content stop being offensive? When does it start?
 

Shakesbear

knows a hawk from a handsaw
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
3,628
Reaction score
463
Location
Elsinore
A lot to think about. I think that being offended by content is a very personal experience. What offends one person does not offend another. My sis-in-law watches a tv programme that not only bores me sideways but also offends me. She will fall about laughing at stuff that makes me leave the room. The programme excludes me because I cannot enter into the spirit of said programme.

Political Correctness is offensive. It creates fear and is sometimes the cause of self censorship in the media.

Too tired to write more ...
 

Eddyz Aquila

Noob Writers United
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
2,034
Reaction score
241
Location
Bucharest, Romania
I did not understand much out of the post, I found it quite confusing to be honest, but I will say this:

Racial stereotyping is not acceptable under any way, and any racist commercial will definitely hit the sensible string.
 

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
38,197
Reaction score
4,544
Location
The End of the World
Racial stereotyping is not acceptable under any way, and any racist commercial will definitely hit the sensible string.

Yes, but then the question would be when is something racial stereotyping and when is it not?

If I said "all black people like fried chicken," that would be stereotyping, for example. But what if I just happened to have a black character who happened to love fried chicken? Surely some people would find that racist, but it isn't necessarily racist — it's the interpretation that is. I remember a news story a while back about a school that was serving fried chicken on MLK Jr. day, and many cried racism, when in fact it was known to be one of his favorite foods.
 

SPMiller

Prodigiously Hanged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
11,525
Reaction score
1,988
Age
41
Location
Dallas
Website
seanpatrickmiller.com
Well, who doesn't like fried chicken? Seriously. Aside from vegetarians, of course. Emphasizing that attribute of a black character would almost certainly be evidence of a racist depiction because you wouldn't emphasize such a detail for a non-black character.
 

SPMiller

Prodigiously Hanged
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
11,525
Reaction score
1,988
Age
41
Location
Dallas
Website
seanpatrickmiller.com
The more I think about it, the more sure I am that I'm correct. Out of the tens or hundreds of thousands of possible dishes out there in the world, you expect me to believe the writer just happened, by chance, to select fried chicken? Holy shit. Anything at all is a better and more interesting choice than perpetuating the stereotype. Lazy thinking and borderline if not qualifiably racist.
 

Wayne K

Banned
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
21,564
Reaction score
8,082
Behind all stereotypes there is a small amout of truth. It's how racists make them work. Either way you go you lose and they win. No one is happy and nothing is solved
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
I think it can be true to character. I've known tons of Black families who eat a lot of foods that I love (being Southern, who were influenced heavily by the Africans). So I'd include a Black family eating fried chicken and collards, absolutely. Maybe not a Northern one -- I have no idea what they like to eat. And if it needs to be said that I don't think Black folks all eat the same thing always, I think I'll smack someone ;)

I also have some dear friends who call themselves 'flamers'. They love seeing camp gays on TV, etc. But I certainly understand that folks take stereotypes waaay too rigidly. I know gay guys you'd have no idea were gay, too. Of course.

I used to hate ditzy female characters. Now that women are portrayed in lots of ways, the ditzy ones don't bug me. I've known some ditzy girls myself, of course :)
 

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
38,197
Reaction score
4,544
Location
The End of the World
If I were to write a memoir, most of my (Native American) relatives would be drunk, fat, and diabetic.
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
The more I think about it, the more sure I am that I'm correct. Out of the tens or hundreds of thousands of possible dishes out there in the world, you expect me to believe the writer just happened, by chance, to select fried chicken? Holy shit. Anything at all is a better and more interesting choice than perpetuating the stereotype. Lazy thinking and borderline if not qualifiably racist.

Of course, it's possible not to be aware of that particular stereotype. And it is a common food. And the characters could all have been latinos in a rough draft, and someone in production decided it would be better to make them black in a later draft, so the fried chicken slips through. Or. Or.

The motive of the writer is probably not what's under consideration, and hopefully most of us are following this thread to avoid writing offensively.

You think that black people depicted eating fried chicken is racist, and it offends you. So where do you draw the line? Is it racist to have black people eat chicken in a commercial?

But how often do we actually see this in real content, outside of advertising? Let's concoct a more likely scenario.

Say I am drawing up my villain, and I decide he's going to be a rich businessman who's goal through the story is to legally obtain my protagonist's family home at any cost. And suppose, drawing a name out of a hat, I call him... R. Stewart, not even realizing that it has Jewish roots.

If that slips past the copy editor, there are going to be allegations of antisemitism. I'd find it deeply offensive, but the version of me that wrote the story would be genuinely confused.

I guess I don't have a point with that example, other than that there isn't a clearly-drawn line between offensive and not-offensive, even though we always know when we're offended and when we aren't.
 
Last edited:

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
20,322
Reaction score
3,513
Location
Transcending Canines
This is an interesting question in general, not just about racial words and material (which is a big, often volatile topic in itself), but any writing that some people would find emotionally charged. Some may find cuss words offensive. Others may find the same passage offensive not because of the actual words but because the character is "cussing at MY political party!"
I like what Lenny Bruce had to say about racial obsenities

Easily ofended people shouldn't watch this
I'm thinking easily offended people shouldn't get on the Internet. But anyway...

That clip reminds me of the fear that I had around the word God for the first 30 years of my life, especially as a child (as well as a bit of fear and confusion around religion in general). Between my parents and the Baptist church Sunday School teachers, I didn't know what to think. I was an atheistic-leaning agnostic, but I truly "didn't know" and I was afraid of the word, the concept, and of the people who used it in a reverent manner, and the vague idea that "what if I'm wrong?"

After a couple years of daily Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, the word God lost all meaning. It's used dozens of times in every meeting, often reverently and it seems just about as often followed by the word damn. After that I can talk about God with the best of them. (Cue Salt'n'Peppa's "Let's Talk About Sex" substituting God for Sex)
Yes, but then the question would be when is something racial stereotyping and when is it not?

If I said "all black people like fried chicken," that would be stereotyping, for example. But what if I just happened to have a black character who happened to love fried chicken? Surely some people would find that racist, but it isn't necessarily racist — it's the interpretation that is. I remember a news story a while back about a school that was serving fried chicken on MLK Jr. day, and many cried racism, when in fact it was known to be one of his favorite foods.
This gets into interpretations and situations about ethnic foods. I doubt anyone would be offended by an Italian character eating pasta, but we've discussed the news story of some person who made these racially-charged stickers, ISTR it was in connection with Obama becoming President - they depicted fried chicken AND watermelon and a couple of other racially stereotypical things. The fried chicken in THAT context was definitely meant as racist.
Of course, it's possible not to be aware of that particular stereotype. And it is a common food. And the characters could all have been latinos in a rough draft, and someone in production decided it would be better to make them black in a later draft, so the fried chicken slips through. Or. Or.

The motive of the writer is probably not what's under consideration, and hopefully most of us are following this thread to avoid writing offensively.

You think that black people depicted eating fried chicken is racist, and it offends you. So where do you draw the line? Is it racist to have black people eat chicken in a commercial?
I recall circa 1970 a Church's Fried Chicken opened up at a corner near where I lived. Sometime during the 1970's or 1980's I heard on the news that Church's was one of the most successful black-owned businesses in Atlanta. So does the fact that it's black-owned change whether or how offensive the commercial is?
 

Mac H.

Board Visitor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,812
Reaction score
406
That's ridiculous. The idea that people shouldn't be allowed to appear in commercials for chicken ?

It wasn't the commercial you linked to, but there was another bizarre racist attack on one of our KFC commercials here in Australia. There is a series of ads showing a guy in a socially awkward situation, but then everybody gets along after he shares his KFC.

This ad was based around cricket, and shows him (as an Aussie wearing Aussie team colours) finding that his seat is in the middle of a group for the opposing team - Sri Lanka.

That ad was deemed offensive by idiots in the USA, because apparently because there is a stereotype that African Americans like chicken.

Logically, because Africans Americans have a similar skin colour to Sri Lankans, they believed that the ad was racist because obviously Sri Lankans must have the same stereotype !!!!

The inherent racism to make that argument is mind-blowing.

Gay characters are often presented in a single, one dimensional light that is decidedly not representative of all gays
But that's the problem.

If I have a character who is gay - that just means that this character is gay. That's it. If viewers are offended by the fact that this one character is decidedly not representative of everyone - so what? It isn't INTENDED to represent all people. It can't do that - anyone who expects it to is being pretty idiotic.

Mac
 
Last edited:

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
That's ridiculous. The idea that people shouldn't be allowed to appear in commercials for chicken ?

There was a bizarre racist attack on one of our KFC commercials here in Australia. There is a series of ads showing a guy in a socially awkward situation, but then everybody gets along after he shares his KFC.

This ad was based around cricket, and shows him (as an Aussie wearing Aussie team colours) finding that his seat is in the middle of a group for the opposing team - Sri Lanka.

That ad was deemed offensive by idiots in the USA, because apparently because there is a stereotype that African Americans like chicken.

Logically, because Africans Americans have a similar skin colour to Sri Lankans, they believed that the ad was racist because obviously Sri Lankans must have the same stereotype !!!!

The inherent racism to make that argument is mind-blowing.

But that's the problem.

If I have a character who is gay - that just means that this character is gay. That's it. If viewers are offended by the fact that this one character is decidedly not representative of everyone - so what? It isn't INTENDED to represent all people. It can't do that - anyone who expects it to is being pretty idiotic.

Mac

Wait, what?

I didn't link a foreign commercial. At least not on purpose.

I MEANT to link this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C17-6FjP7g
 

Bartholomew

Comic guy
Kind Benefactor
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
8,507
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Kansas! Again.
I recall circa 1970 a Church's Fried Chicken opened up at a corner near where I lived. Sometime during the 1970's or 1980's I heard on the news that Church's was one of the most successful black-owned businesses in Atlanta. So does the fact that it's black-owned change whether or how offensive the commercial is?

I think there's a general belief that members of a race can violate certain social rules related to their own race, so I, personally, would say no. But I didn't make a broad, sweeping statement that any writer who portrayed this was behaving in a racist fashion.

It's a good thought, though. Does the source of an offensive remark matter? I know if I hear a black comedian dropping racist slurs, I'm mildly offended, but not enough to change the channel. I'll turn Carlos Mencia off the minute I see his face. And if Lewis Black or someone started ranting about "Them Darkies" I'd probably crap a kitten-shaped brick. (That's pretty damn offended.)

So I guess it matters to me.
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
How did a general question about offense so suddenly zoom into a US-focused political question of cultural inclusion?

For me, the issue of offense is one of the audience's relationship to the material. An audience can get offended if they feel that their values, beliefs, sensibilities or expectations are not adequately reflected. The more we expect to be catered to, the more offended we may become.

It's very easy to give offence, and the more diverse our audience the harder it is not to. Also, the more unusual the communication the easier it is to offend. Since our most cherished fiction often has some new perspective to offer, it's not surprising then that a lot of it is controversial. Some writers see that controversy itself as a sign of success but I often look on it as a sort of failure -- every reader we offend is one we failed to reach.

But not all readers can be reached or catered to. When confronted with a new idea, some will take time to digest it; others will spit it out and blame the author. Our challenge then is to work out whether the problem is with the idea itself, how we expressed it, or the audience?
 

Shakesbear

knows a hawk from a handsaw
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
3,628
Reaction score
463
Location
Elsinore
How did a general question about offense so suddenly zoom into a US-focused political question of cultural inclusion?

For me, the issue of offense is one of the audience's relationship to the material. An audience can get offended if they feel that their values, beliefs, sensibilities or expectations are not adequately reflected. The more we expect to be catered to, the more offended we may become.

I agree with you on that point. Yet I think it is also when someone feels that their "values, beliefs, sensibilities or expectations are not adequately" respected.

It's very easy to give offence, and the more diverse our audience the harder it is not to. Also, the more unusual the communication the easier it is to offend. Since our most cherished fiction often has some new perspective to offer, it's not surprising then that a lot of it is controversial. Some writers see that controversy itself as a sign of success but I often look on it as a sort of failure -- every reader we offend is one we failed to reach.

But not all readers can be reached or catered to. When confronted with a new idea, some will take time to digest it; others will spit it out and blame the author. Our challenge then is to work out whether the problem is with the idea itself, how we expressed it, or the audience?

If a reader is offended then I think they have been reached - their views and values have been challenged and they have to work through that. It is not always that a piece of writing is offensive but that the interpretation of it is preconditioned by the reader own experiences. How much of our writing should we change to meet the challenge of not being offensive?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.