# My kid got kicked out of the zoo for a shirt !



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

My son (age 7), and our entire family, got asked to leave the zoo because he was wearing a shirt the said (across the top): "Ancient Chinese proverb:" and then had Chinese style writing (written from bottom to top)--in English--"Fuck this Shit". It looked like Chinese writing when you looked at it from straight on, and you had to turn your head severely to the side to see what it really said in English. My cousin bought this shirt for my son, and it really is adorable on him---AND he loves it ! The zoo "rent-a-cop" said it was a violation of the "family values" of the zoo, and told us if we didn't leave immediately, we would be forcibly made to leave ! I asked him to show me in writing where it said that in the zoo policies, and he said it was just a "spoken rule" and "should be obvious" that they wouldn't allow such a thing in a "family environment" ! I feel my son's rights were violated, not to mention the rest of the family's rights, seeing as how we paid good money to get into the zoo--money which was NOT refunded ! We never have a hangup in our family about such words and my kids also don't see why it was such a big deal, especially since you REALLY had to look to understand what it said. What do all of you think ?? Advice and opinions, PLEASE! My son said "Fuck their policies!" and i agreed with him ! LOL !


----------



## siddie (Jan 15, 2003)

I wouldn't want to see profanities (even written top to bottom) at the zoo. Kids figure these things out and say it over and over for shock value. I don't want my ds saying that. I do't like to see grafitti with those words around either. nThey should have given you the option of changing shirts or getting a refund.


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

I think they should have refunded your money, but I think they are within their rights. Disneyland does the same thing- they will let you wear the "offensive" shirt inside out, though.

I don't get offended by profanity, but it's common courtesy to not wear offensive shirts in family settings, in my opinion.

Kristi


----------



## brandywine (Mar 25, 2004)

Yeah, it's offensive to me, but I agree with above posters that you should have been refunded.


----------



## dynamicdoula (Jun 11, 2004)

7yo wearing a shirt in a zoo w/the F word on it? Yeah.. to me at least, a little offensive, and I'm no prude!







I would definitely be upset if I saw that at the zoo. When my husband was 16 he was told to either leave the mall or turn his t-shirt inside out that said "If you dont like what we do" on the front, and "Fuck off" on the back. I would be less offended to see a 16yo w/the shirt than a 7yo! lol It is a little funny tho too, but just not at a zoo where the place is primarily for children, ykwim? Maybe at Monster Jam!









As far as refunding your $... I am not sure. If you guys had been yelling profanities and they'd kicked you out, would you have expected a refund? I think they could have given him the option to turn the shirt inside out or leave, but I don't know that a refund is appropriate.


----------



## AahRee (Jan 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dynamicdoula*
7yo wearing a shirt in a zoo w/the F word on it? Yeah.. to me at least, a little offensive, and I'm no prude!







I would definitely be upset if I saw that at the zoo. When my husband was 16 he was told to either leave the mall or turn his t-shirt inside out that said "If you dont like what we do" on the front, and "Fuck off" on the back. I would be less offended to see a 16yo w/the shirt than a 7yo! lol It is a little funny tho too, but just not at a zoo where the place is primarily for children, ykwim? Maybe at Monster Jam!









As far as refunding your $... I am not sure. If you guys had been yelling profanities and they'd kicked you out, would you have expected a refund? I think they could have given him the option to turn the shirt inside out or leave, but I don't know that a refund is appropriate.

ITA with this whole post.







: I'm shocked that they even make a shirt like that to fit a 7 y.o., let alone that anyone would buy it or wear it in a family environment. And yeah, kids aren't stupid. They're going to figure out what it says FAST, and repeat it (probably where my 2 year old's innocent ears can hear).


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

I don't think the issue is whether or not the shirt was offensive. I think the issue is whether or not a security officer has the right to make someone leave a public place for wearing an offensive shirt, especially threatening to "forcibly remove" a non-violent customer. I see this as a First Amendment issue. A man here locally was made to leave a mall for wearing a pro-peace shirt. A security officer decided that pro-peace was the same as anti-soldier/anti-war/anti-Bush whatever and was therefore offensive. It doesn't matter if people are offended by it or not. People don't have the right to not be offended. Lots of people are offended by breastfeeding, you know. This is a bad precedent. I think the OP should contact the ACLU.


----------



## feebeeglee (Nov 30, 2002)

Definitely think you should have been offered a refund if they didn't tell you you could turn it inside out, or even if they did and you/he didn't want to.

I'd expect most public places, especially family-oriented ones, to not permit outright obscenities in printed form. Even if they were well-disguised.


----------



## Emzachsmama (Apr 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *feebeeglee*
Definitely think you should have been offered a refund if they didn't tell you you could turn it inside out, or even if they did and you/he didn't want to.

I'd expect most public places, especially family-oriented ones, to not permit outright obscenities in printed form. Even if they were well-disguised.









I totally agree.


----------



## feebeeglee (Nov 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
...People don't have the right to not be offended...

What about hate speech?

I realize that's OT really, Alice, if you wanna PM me instead that's cool. Altho I predict this discussion will venture far and wide from the OP :LOL


----------



## anythingelse (Nov 26, 2001)

stupid ? for the night - is that zoo you went to a public place??? If you paid to get in, it is not public right?? so if it is run by an organization they should be able to make their rules of what is okay & not okay to wear there I would think. not only to respect 'family values' but to keep their guests safe from gang violence as well or a lot of neked skin

it is your right to dress a lil girl in slutty stuff with make up at age 7 or your lil ds in a shirt with profanity on it but at a place you pay to go to that has rules for clothing posted, nope sympathy from here cause you got to play by their rules


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vanna's Mom*
they should be able to make their rules of what is okay & not okay to wear there

What if they made a rule that all females have to wear dresses? What if they say I can't breastfeed? Or that if I do I have to make sure that not a speck of skin shows? And what about that pro-peace shirt?


----------



## anythingelse (Nov 26, 2001)

hey I am not down on you for doing anything of those things, just saying it is your right to dress your kid anyway you want even if it is profane, pic of something gross, or skin baringly sexy seven yr old girl

you knew when you put the shirt out for your ds to choose from that half of america would be offended and some would not 'get it' and another bunch would think it was a hoot

But there are places where there are dress codes -for example I bet your ds does not wear that t shirt to school, there are private zoos & public zoos I would not have left, I would have prob just turned my kids shirt inside out, we have done that before in our family cause my ds has shirt that is not allowed at his df school & we went to watch df in a class show


----------



## indie (Jun 16, 2003)

I don't know why you would let your kid wear that shirt in the first place.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

Hhmm... I find it interesting that everyone is worked up about the word fuck and no one cares about the intrinsic cultural insensitivity. I have mixed feelings about you being forced to leave. They probably do 'reserve the right to deny service' blah blah blah... and the shirt was indecent by some standards. An opportunity to turn it inside out or a refund should have been offered. IMO a business has the right, within legal limits, to insist that you not destroy the atmosphere on which heir livlihood depends.


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

I think they were within their rights if they can show you the portion of their rules that states that there is a dress code involving phrases or styles commonly perceived as obscene. If they don't have this, they were wrong for sending you out, and I agree with sbf in contacting aclu.

Other than that, I'd say "fudge them!"


----------



## muse (Apr 17, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kama'aina mama*
Hhmm... I find it interesting that everyone is worked up about the word fuck and no one cares about the intrinsic cultural insensitivity.

ITA. The cultural insensitivity of that T-shirt sounds just gross.


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

What kama'aina mama said.


----------



## mgmsmommy (Jun 24, 2003)

I also think you should have been offered the option of turning the shirt inside out as well. Then it would have been your choice to cooperate or not, but do not feel a refund was warranted. This is a matter of common courtesy to others & I don't think there is anywhere where they would have given you back the money if you didn't want to follow the rules, written or not. JMHO


----------



## Ravin (Mar 19, 2002)

The thing that bugs me is that they kicked you out based on something for which they didn't have a written policy. I would probably write a letter to the zoo and complain about the security guy.

Did they give you the option of turning the shirt inside out or changing shirts?

I would write them and tell them that if they're going to kick paying patrons out for violating their "family values" code they need to write said code down.


----------



## Rainbow (Nov 19, 2001)

I'm with SBF- the only question I'm asking is if the zoo is public or private? Privately owned business can (I think) ask such things if they have the same rules in writing for all guests. I do also think you should have been refunded.

The issue is not should she let her son wear this shirt- she does. Now we're looking at the legality of asking her family to leave. We can't ask everyone to share our ideals. I don't get why people let their kids be walking advertisements but I wouldn't imply you're somehow lacking or wrong for doing so. And I certainly would support your right to do so in a public place. So maybe we can back off from saying it is ok because YOU find it offensive and look at the issue. Just me .02


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

1. As someone with a large Asian component to my family, I am probably more offended by the cultural insensitivity of that shirt, than the profanity itself. Profanity, in the right context, does not upset me. However, I will confess that seeing it on a 7 year old would make me seriously question the values of the parent (perhaps that is my own inherent bias or prudishness, not saying it is wrong and I'm right, but I'd feel that way nevertheless and I'm sure others would, and my concern would be how that child is treated as a result).

2. The zoo is not a public place unless you have free access and your tax dollars go directly to support it, in which case rules would be made by an elected board, to which you would have input as a tax-paying citizen. When you pay to enter a facility, you are presented with rules, and if you don't like them, you don't have to go. This is far different from being told to leave a public place b/c of what you are wearing. If the OP was just walking through the park, then I would agree she has the right to put on her kids whatever she likes. But a zoo is a paid-entrance place, and frankly I would be offended to see a kid wearing something like that in a family-oriented place.

3. I would agree that the OP deserved a refund IF the rules were not CLEARLY POSTED in the place where she purchased the tickets (which I'm guessing they weren't).


----------



## PurpleBasil (Jan 28, 2004)

Do the animals f*ck and shit at the zoo? that's what I would have asked.

But I have a knee jerk reaction to a 7 year old wearing that shirt and then using the word (f*ck) because I think it's best to save those words for the years down the road.

I don't think your son is a threat to family values (whatever that means at an institution for cage animals with inherently reduced life spans because of their placement at a zoo) but I am not keen on that shirt for a young boy and don't find it 'adorable' as a concept.


----------



## tofumama (Jan 20, 2004)

Hmmm...I agree with the cultural piece of this, its just, well, tacky. Yes, it could be seen as funny or cute, but honestly, I too would question the appropriateness of that kind of shirt on a 7yo, as I am not sure a child would understand the implications of wearing that shirt. (this coming from a woman with a mouth that often hurls explicatives ad nauseum) That being said, I do not agree with you being asked to leave the zoo, or 'threatened' to be removed, etc. I think the turning the shirt inside out option should have been offered. If they could have proven that in their rules somewhere it states you can't wear offensive shirts to the zoo, well then you are sh*t out of luck.
But, what did you expect? Did you think no-one would figure the shirt out? Of course it is your right to dress the way you choose (or dress your child) but when you are going to wear clothes like that, or some other article of clothing that makes a 'statement' there are bound to be people who's feathers it ruffles. Isn't that the point?


----------



## Rainbow (Nov 19, 2001)

Piglet- I was trying to stay off of the "is it offensive" part of the post to focus on the "is it legal" part of asking them to leave. However If I would have gotten into it I would have said the exact same things as in your #1. Chinese calligraphy is more than writing. It is an art, and a very meaningful part of their culture. I'm more disturbed by the spoofing of that than swear words.


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

Right or wrong, wouldn't it be *common sense* that a shirt with profanity would create problems if worn at a place geared toward children? Are you actually surprised that someone took issue with it? They are only words, but much of the population do find it offensive, especially in relation to children. Plus, teaching children such a lack of respect for people's culture is very disturbing. It is your choice to let your child wear what he wants, but you really can't be terribly surprised at other people's reactions.


----------



## vermonter (Jan 6, 2002)

It all comes down to law. I agree with Piglet. I probably is a private for profit organization. They then have their own written rules and regulations probably based on federal and state statutes. You can ask for a copy of those. They also should have been posted for the public to review.

Personally, I would not let my child, at age 7, wear a shirt like that. I don't think a child of that age could fully understand the implications of the message or why someone would get offended. At that age, they probably just think it is "cool".

If you feel like your rights and your sons rights were violated I am sure you probably have a local Office of Civil rights in your area or in the city that is closest to you. You can contact them. They most likely provide free advice over the phone. You can also explore filing a complaint with the zoo.


----------



## mocha09 (Jul 6, 2003)

I agree that the shirt was inappropriate for the zoo, on 2 levels...both using the "f" word in a family environment, and on a cultural level.

Maybe you should write a letter to the zoo and ask them to re-frame and make clear a policy which states that people who wear clothes with profanities on them could be given the option of turning them inside out before being kicked out of the zoo.

I suppose we could have a long discussion about rights here.... It seems to me that people are very focused on their rights, but not always as focused on their responsibilties.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Hmm, many issues here. Do I like the shirt? No, I find that tacky on a 7 year old. But hey, that's why mine won't wear one. I also find baby gap logos tacky on a shirt, so I certainly understand differing opinions on this.

Regarding the legality of it: The First Amendment only protects citizens from government entities, not private entities. So assuming the zoo is a private place, the First Amendment is not applicable. How is this different than breastfeeding? The right to breastfeed in a public place is a law, which I would say makes it a 'protected' group. For instance, you could not kick out someone because of their race or gender, because they are protected groups under law.

I probably would have asked them to show me where the rule against profanity is stated (but would not be surprised that they do have a rule against it at a family park). If we wanted to stay I would have offered to turn the shirt inside out, which should have been good enough for them. But otherwise, it sounds like it was within their rights to ask you to leave.


----------



## ray_eeg (Jun 7, 2004)

I fully plan on allowing swear words to be used in my house (or, continue to be used







). But, IMO, part of allowing your children to use "f-ck" or any other supposedly offensive word is teaching him/her the inherent power of that word. It's teaching that sort of sensitivity (i.e. Grandma doesn't like those words in her house, so we shouldn't use them there) that is so important if you allow your child to "swear". Further, that sensitivity will hopefully lead your child (and maybe you) to question, for example whether it is appropriate to make light of the Chinese tradition of calligraphy. (Personally, I think we are all too careful to not offend anyone, but that's way OT.)

With regard to the security guard/power tripper, I would have planted my two feet and asked them whether he thought discriminating against those who chose to wear certain types of clothing was in line with enhancing family values. Or whether he felt threatened enough by your 7 year old child to forcibly remove him along with the rest of your family. I question whether rules that aren't available to patrons are really enforcible. Needless to say, I wouldn't return to that zoo!


----------



## SabrinaJL (Apr 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mocha09*
I suppose we could have a long discussion about rights here.... It seems to me that people are very focused on their rights, but not always as focused on their responsibilties.









That's the best statement I've heard all day. I may have to steal that for a sig.









As far as the OT goes, I also think if there was no written policy she should have been offered the option to turn it inside out or given a refund if they preferred not to. If there WAS a written policy then the zoo was in the right.

As far as the shirt itself, I don't buy it when people say, "They're just words". Like it or not, all words have meaning. Not just definition. Meaning. Just as please and thank you are generally accepted as nice and polite, fuck and shit are generally accepted as rude and offensive.

I agree with ray_eeg too. I've told my 10 yo dd that I don't mind if she uses swear words but she needs to use her judgement about when and where it is appropriate to use them. So far the only time I've actually heard her use one was when we were reading a book aloud together.


----------



## Mom4tot (Apr 18, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama*
Right or wrong, wouldn't it be *common sense* that a shirt with profanity would create problems if worn at a place geared toward children? Are you actually surprised that someone took issue with it? They are only words, but much of the population do find it offensive, especially in relation to children. Plus, teaching children such a lack of respect for people's culture is very disturbing. It is your choice to let your child wear what he wants, but you really can't be terribly surprised at other people's reactions.

ITA.


----------



## beaconlighthero (May 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siddie*
I wouldn't want to see profanities (even written top to bottom) at the zoo. Kids figure these things out and say it over and over for shock value. I don't want my ds saying that. I do't like to see grafitti with those words around either. nThey should have given you the option of changing shirts or getting a refund.

I agree.


----------



## beaconlighthero (May 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vanna's Mom*
stupid ? for the night - is that zoo you went to a public place??? If you paid to get in, it is not public right?? so if it is run by an organization they should be able to make their rules of what is okay & not okay to wear there I would think. not only to respect 'family values' but to keep their guests safe from gang violence as well or a lot of neked skin

it is your right to dress a lil girl in slutty stuff with make up at age 7 or your lil ds in a shirt with profanity on it but at a place you pay to go to that has rules for clothing posted, nope sympathy from here cause you got to play by their rules


She said that the rule was not posted and that the security guard said it was a spoken rule. I guess once I got home I would be calling the zoo asking to speak to the head person and tell them if they are going to have that rule they need to post it so everyone can see it.


----------



## jaime302 (May 4, 2004)

Just as an aside... If some states- Virginia being one of them, public profanity is illegal, a misdeamor if charged... I wonder if a shirt would fall under that? I don't know where everyone is from, but it might be an important note to point out


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

I believe the zoo was well within its rights to request that you either remove the shirt, turn it inside out, or leave. I do not believe that, legally, they have to have a specific policy beyond "inappropriate behaviour is not permitted". However, clearly the security person overstepped by being rude and threatening to you and your family. If I were the OP, I would protest over the WAY they were treated, but I do not believe there is any real opportunity to protest WHY they were asked to leave. IMHO, no refund is due, though the opportunity to purchase another shirt, change (I always have at least one spare set of clothes for each kid), or turn the shirt inside out should have been given.

People can chose to wear what they like, or have their kids dress as they like. But in some situations those clothes are inappropriate and businesses have the right to enforce their own standards. That is why some restaurants still have dress codes. Even the ballpart here has dress requirements (you have to have a shirt on). That is legal and, IMHO, appropriate for them to do. You either follow their rules or you don't go.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
My son (age 7), and our entire family, got asked to leave the zoo because he was wearing a shirt the said (across the top): "Ancient Chinese proverb:" and then had Chinese style writing (written from bottom to top)--in English--"Fuck this Shit". It looked like Chinese writing when you looked at it from straight on, and you had to turn your head severely to the side to see what it really said in English. My cousin bought this shirt for my son, and it really is adorable on him---AND he loves it ! cop" I asked him to show me in writing where it said that in the zoo policies, and he said it was just a "spoken rule" and "should be obvious" that they wouldn't allow such a thing in a "family environment" ! I feel my son's rights were violated

Okay there is a few things in this post that hit a nerve with me. I have read over the entire thread and posts by Kama, Indie and Oceanbaby resonated with the way I feel too.

But I just have to try and understand....What part of this t-shirt is adorable? It is a clearly racist t-shirt. Do you not see that? Chinese proverb....fuck this shirt?

I would be offended greatly if a saw a [/I]seven_ year old wearing this shirt. I am glad that the zoo kicked him out and to compare the right to wear this tshirt in public to the right to breastfeed in public (which is a law) is plan idiocy.

And you claim your son's right are violated...what about the rights of all the other families to not see such garbage!

Flame me if you will. I think profanity is a sign of ignorance._


----------



## AahRee (Jan 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
What if they made a rule that all females have to wear dresses? And what about that pro-peace shirt?

If these were the rules for our zoo, I'd either comply or not go. Breastfeeding is a different issue. That's not about what someone is wearing, it's about feeding a child. Surely, most of us here realize that.


----------



## greymama (May 30, 2003)

If my child had seen that shirt and read it, I might have kicked you out myself. I even hate to see adults wear shirts that have ignorant and stupid sayings written on them. It's not funny, it's not cute and it's not adorable. It's ignorant. Yes, you should have had the opportunity to turn the shirt inside out and I would have asked the security gaurd if that was an option. I mean are you really surprised that shirt is offensive? C'mon! I'm also a little taken back by the fact that you 7-year-old son says "f--- their policies."


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

Uh... I would be upset to see *anyone* at the zoo where a shirt with profanity on it. I'm not sure why its worse on a 7 yo. In fact, I would feel more threatened seeing it on a grown man at the zoo.


----------



## China white (Mar 29, 2004)

I agree with mountain mom. I would feel my rights were not taken into consideration if my 7 yr old, who's been reading since he was 5, asked me what that meant. Sure, I wouldn't have to explain it to him, but I wouldn't want him to repeat it either. And **I** feel it is belittling to the chinese community.
To compare profanity with breastfeeding is ridiculous, IMO. 2 different issues, entirely.
Just curious here, not accusatory, but if your child were in a playground or some such thing, and something upset him, would he use these words? I'm just wondering because you said his response to being forced to leave was "f*ck their rules". Do you teach him the responsibilty that goes with being able to use such words? Just because *you* allow it and see no harm in it, doesn't mean everyone will be so liberal, you know?


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

If I were the guard, I would have asked him to turn it inside out or change. If you refused, you would have had to leave. Come on, it's the zoo. You're not at a concert or a bar. You were at the zoo.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rainbow*
Piglet- I was trying to stay off of the "is it offensive" part of the post to focus on the "is it legal" part of asking them to leave.

I read your post after I posted mine. I probably should have done what you did.









I didn't want this to turn into a bashing of the OP, but it is hard not to be shocked at this situation of allowing a young child out in a shirt like that.

I guess what I'd want the OP to know is that I can see why such a shirt would be banned, that these sorts of values are not mine, but that doesn't make them any more "right" or "wrong", so I'm not trying to pass judgement, just give my 2 cents'...

The real issue is, as others have said, whether these rules were posted clearly where people purchase their tickets (and if not, I think a refund would have been in order) and also how the OP and her family were treated (rules can be enforced without undue harrassment).


----------



## Rainbow (Nov 19, 2001)

I'm totally in agreement with ya piglet- very rational









Jyust sort of off topic. My DH is part japanese- reads and writes japanese. He gets annoyed at the mindless use of calligraphy- but he saw one once that said something a long the lines of "coconut head" And by the looks of the rest of teh shirt it didn't seem to be intentional. He was laughing SO hard.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68*
How the OP and her family were treated (rules can be enforced without undue harrassment).

I think that this should be commmented on. I believe the kind of attitude or 'energy' you put out into the world is the kind you will recieve back.

That t-shirt is clearly aggressive so I would have to say that by putting that message out there....you are gonna get attitude back. What else do you expect?

What was the initial motivation to wear the tshirt? Its not like you are spreading love and kindness.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

k


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
That t-shirt is clearly aggressive so I would have to say that by putting that message out there....you are gonna get attitude back. What else do you expect?[/b]











Thank you, mountain mom. I've been trying to put my finger on the major irksome factor about this situation and I think you've just done it.

Wear what you want, I suppose, but don't be surprised when people act in kind. I'm going to stick my neck out and say that I think it's pretty irresponsible to allow a child to wear such a shirt. It puts them in an unfair position where they're likely to be exposed to behavior directed their way that they're not ready to effectively handle.


----------



## mirthfulmum (Mar 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
If the OP had gone to someones home rather than the zoo, a private place where you should be aware that you don't get to make the rules, would they have been as offended if that someone asked them to take their trashy crap out of their home? What about out of their bookstore, daycare center, church, ice cream parlor................. When you enter an establishment or place other than your home or a truly public place you ought to be respectful of others and comply with what you would expect the rules to be wether you can see them posted clearly.

ITA. I am by no means overly-sensitive, a prude, nor do I offend easily. But the t-shirt is in bad taste, on anyone.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
Flame me if you will. I think profanity is a sign of ignorance.

Well, I think being uptight about profanity is a sign of ignorance.

(I swear all the time and am not ignorant just as you, who doesn't curse, are not ignorant; so enough with saying that people who think differently than you are showing their stupidity)

That said, the shirt probably falls into the inappropriate catagory. My kids can wear whatever they want (swear words shirts, hootchie skirts, whatever), but I will forewarn them about the consequences of dressing inappropriately (people will, at best, give you disapproving looks for not dressing the way other people are dressed for the occasion; at worst you will be harrassed and asked to leave). In this case, I would have encouraged him to change before the zoo and let him suffer the consequences if he didn't (i.e. he has to wear the shirt inside out or watch his family's day at the zoo be squelshed).


----------



## DreamerMama (Feb 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rainbow*
I'm totally in agreement with ya piglet- very rational









Jyust sort of off topic. My DH is part japanese- reads and writes japanese. He gets annoyed at the mindless use of calligraphy- but he saw one once that said something a long the lines of "coconut head" And by the looks of the rest of teh shirt it didn't seem to be intentional. He was laughing SO hard.


:LOL

I know what you mean. My cousin just got a tattoo with japanese letters...I can't remember what they mean. I asked him, are you sure that means what you think it means....It could be japanese for jack ass you know.


----------



## Meiri (Aug 31, 2002)

Quote:

My son said "Fuck their policies!" and i agreed with him ! LOL !
Are you going to agree with him when that attitude extends to the law when he reaches driving age? Do you agree with that attitude when you and your DH make a rule for your family?

Much as I don't follow many aspects of mainstream culture, I also think that teaching children total disregard for rules or laws or respecting others' feelings is not funny, nor is it doing that child any favors in the long run.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
Well, I think being uptight about profanity is a sign of ignorance.

(I swear all the time and am not ignorant just as you, who doesn't curse, are not ignorant; so enough with saying that people who think differently than you are showing their stupidity)

I just want to clarify....If one use swear words to describe something or how they feel I think that _that_ is a sign that their vocabulary could use some work.

Ignorance can be defined as not knowing any better. Is it better to communicate with foul language than without.

Do you encourage your children to describe something or their emotions with profanity?

It is your choice to swear, I would just hope that you do not perpetuate this onto your children.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
I just want to clarify....If one use swear words to describe something or how they feel I think that _that_ is a sign that their vocabulary could use some work.


Nope, I have a wonderful vocab (belied by the use of a vague word like wonderful"







). Swear words can be expressive and creative. I said this before in another thread - my dad has a Ph.D. in modern American poetry and a potty mouth. Many of his English professor friends curse like crazy.

Great works of literature, by authors whose entire lives are vocab words, are full of swear words

Ok, back to the thread at hand . . .







:


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
Do you encourage your children to describe something or their emotions with profanity?

It is your choice to swear, I would just hope that you do not perpetuate this onto your children.

Oh wow, somehow missed the second part of this. I will encoruage my kids to articulate what they feel as best they can however they feel works best (it is their emotion, afterall). Using swear words doesn't prevent anyone from knowing/using other words. Now, my kids can't call people names (including stupid), and you have to be aware of what is and isn't appropiate in different situations, but otherwise, my saying swear words my entire life (parents never censored us except to say we shouldn't curse in public) hasn't prevented me from being able to articuate my emotions in very nuanced ways in a myrid of situations.

Again, using swear words doesn't prevent anyone from knowing/using other words. And again, back to thread







:


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

In your case using profanity did not interfere with building your vocabulary.

But in reference to the thread....its a seven year old boy wearing a t-shirt with the f word on it and being encouraged to express himself about being kicked out of the zoo by using the same expression.

I think that is ignorant. There are better lessons to teach a child.

The more I think of the original post the more I think its gotta be a joke! No one in their right of mind would encourage a child to wear a shirt like that to the zoo or anywhere really, and when kicked out for it, to come back by saying "fuck the rule"???? Wheres the respect in that.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
The more I think of the original post the more I think its gotta be a joke!

Yea, I thought it was a little over the top. But with 54 posts - a lot for a joke.

I do tend to side with the OP, only because parenting (whatever the parenting philosophy) seems to have gotten so uptight lately. When I grew up (elementary school in late seventies), no one was so hysterical about protecting kids from offensive t-shirts. Guess I'm feeling nostalgic . . .

Of course, I won't let my kids watch Disney, so I'm being a little bit of a hypocrite


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
I do tend to side with the OP, only because parenting (whatever the parenting philosophy) seems to have gotten so uptight lately. When I grew up (elementary school in late seventies), no one was so hysterical about protecting kids from offensive t-shirts. Guess I'm feeling nostalgic . . .

Of course, I won't let my kids watch Disney, so I'm being a little bit of a hypocrite









I totally get you on that one!!! I would rather dd hear a swear than sit through some of the sacharrin thats out there.

Peace mama


----------



## dandamomma (May 3, 2004)




----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

First, the topic at hand: your son's rights were not violated. Your son does not have the right to do something that violates the policies of a private establishment, and that establishment need not have their policies posted in order to enforce them. They can't make up policies on the spot to discriminate against your son in specific, but in this case, a vague "inappropriate attire" or even vaguer "inappropriate conduct" is sufficient to cover clothing. They do not owe you a refund or a chance to rectify the situation. They are well within their rights to ask you to leave for violating their policies (and said policies would seem self-evident in this case).

Next, the topic not at hand: What are you teaching your child if you allow him to enjoy the demeaning of another culture? What are you teaching your child if you allow him to belittle the regulations that others are legally entitled to implement? What are you teaching your child if you tell him (directly or indirectly) that language that can and often is used as a weapon against others is appropriate for any situation at all? What are you teaching your child if you raise him to believe that his "right" to make others uncomfortable is more important to a viable and healthy society than his responsibility to be a constructive force in said society?

Why would you place your seven-year-old son in the position to receive the vitriol of those who find the message on his shirt offensive? He's a very little child. My personal opinion is that you are stealing his innocence by forcing him to confront these issues too soon.

I can't conceive of *any* circumstance in which a child sporting powerful, hurtful, vulgar words would be considered "adorable." Words are not just words, they are the means by which we shape our consciousness, so to claim that those of us who are offended by them are just prude is incorrect. People wouldn't use swear words if they didn't have power, and the power of swear words does not lie in their fostering of a positive climate.

I agree with the poster who stated that people have become so caught up in their rights that they forget that their responsibilities are *equally* important. And with the poster who stated that common sense would indicate that swear words are not acceptable at a children's function.

Wilma

**Sorry for the empty post. Dandamomma is my SIL, and I didn't know she was still logged in.**


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

I still hold that being ejected for violating a policy that the individual was violating at the time his money was taken warrents arefund. If he had smuggled the shirt in and put it on after buying his ticket to intentionally thwart a policy that would be one thing... but he had the shirt on when they admitted him. If it was in violation his money should never have been taken and he should not have been let in. If the zoo wants to rectify half of that oversight, they really need to rectify the whole thing.


----------



## nikirj (Oct 1, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kama'aina mama*
I still hold that being ejected for violating a policy that the individual was violating at the time his money was taken warrents arefund. If he had smuggled the shirt in and put it on after buying his ticket to intentionally thwart a policy that would be one thing... but he had the shirt on when they admitted him. If it was in violation his money should never have been taken and he should not have been let in. If the zoo wants to rectify half of that oversight, they really need to rectify the whole thing.

I totally agree with this. Whatever else I think about that shirt (I won't add my .02, we've got plenty of that), I agree that if he got in wearing it, he shouldn't be kicked out without the refund.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[


----------



## frand (May 8, 2004)

Seeing that shirt on a 7 year old child would depress me.
Maybe when he's 8 he'll get a shirt that says "S_ _ _ Happens" in Korean!


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Bunnysmomma, that was a wonderful and well-written post. I hesitated to say that, since I'm worried about this degenerating into an "attack the OP" thread....so I'm not going to say you are "right" or "wrong" but just that I certainly resonated with what you said, and from the perspective of "our opinion" I think you did a beautiful job of wording it. The OP is free to disagree, of course, but I couldn't agree more with what you said.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Everyone keeps saying "Are you surprised that someone was offended? Did you expect no one to react?" That is NOT THE POINT. We are not talking about people being offended. We are not talking about another customer coming up and saying "that shirt offends me and I think it's inappropriate." We are talking about a security officer forcing someone to leave a place of public accomodation -- a place that welcomes the public -- a place where people do not leave the Bill of Rights at the door. It doesn't matter if it isn't public property. A place that can't discriminate against race or breastfeeding mothers, etc, also cannot abridge the freedom of expression. They can't throw you out for verbally saying "fuck" (as long as you're not screaming it), and they can't throw you out for your shirt "saying" it either. We're not talking about a person's private house where they can make whatever rules they want, including welcoming only white people.

I don't know why people think the comparison with breastfeeding is so preposterous. MANY people ARE offended by breastfeeding, even if people here at MDC are not. The point here is that you can't make someone leave just because other people are offended by them. People do NOT have the "right" to not be offended. I find it ironic that one of the people who said that the comparison is ridiculous also said something like 'what about other people's right to not have to look at' whatever, because that's the EXACT same thing that some people say about breastfeeding.

You can't force your family values on other people. It's a free country.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

A place that can't discriminate against race or breastfeeding mothers, etc, also cannot abridge the freedom of expression. They can't throw you out for verbally saying "fuck" (as long as you're not screaming it), and they can't throw you out for your shirt "saying" it either.
Yes, they can. Breastfeeding, women, people of different races - these 'classes' of people are specifically protected by law. Freedom of expression is only protected under the First Amendment, and that is only with regard to government entities. A private establishment absolutely has the right to set their own rules about appropriate language and conduct. There is no law protecting the right of a person to swear in a private establishment.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
We are talking about a security officer forcing someone to leave a place of public accomodation -- a place that welcomes the public -- a place where people do not leave the Bill of Rights at the door. It doesn't matter if it isn't public property..

Actually, it does matter. The Bill of Rights ONLY protects individuals from the government. It DOES NOT protect individuals from private entitites, be they corporate or individual. So, if this was city/state/federal property, the Bill of Rights would apply and this situation would probably be covered under the 1st Amendment, though there have been 1st Amendmen exceptions for obsenity. Assuming that this was a private zoo (either for-profit or not), then the Bill of Rights has no bearing. A private place has the right to deny service to people. Country clubs can still exclude women from the golf course, or gays, or children. Race is generally covered under city, state or federal laws (which are different issues than the Constitution). So there is no 1st Amendment violation here, unless this was a zoo run by the government. There MAY be a violation of other laws, but probably not.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

SBF... I did address that, I thought. Businesses do have some rights to restrict your behavior and even your wardrobe choices so long as they are not breaking the law by discriminating. That's why a restaurant can say "no short pants" or "jacket and necktie required on all gentlemen" and why a tennis court or a golf course can insist on both specific kinds of shoes and particular dress codes. Even public courses and courts paid for with tax dollars (well, more the shoes than the 'shirt with a collar' thing there...) And yes, private businesses have a right to protect their ability to make money by restricting the behavior of their patrons to that end. If you want to go into a casino and start shouting about the evils of gambling and drinking they have a right to insist you leave. If you want to wear clothing that has scatalogical or sexual or obscene language on it they have aright to insist you leave. And yes, they have the same right if you are using your mouth to say it.

The Bill of Rights prevents the government from taking steps to abridge your free speech. It does not compel anyone to accomodate you on their property while you exercise it, particularly when you chose to do so in a manner that disrupts their business. Nor does it compel anyone to provide you with a platform from which to say whatever you like, which I remind people of everytime they start hollaring about freedom of speech here at MDC.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

ITA with Raven, well said!

I don't like the idea of infringing on what people can wear and honestly I think that parents who see it can explain it to their own kids. There are people out and about (even at the zoo) making choices I DO NOT agree with and would prefer my children not being exposed to (smoking anyone?) but I explain them as their personal preference. If I do not want my personal preferences infringed upon, I cannot infringe upon others. I don't think F*** is family appropriate, but others may say that gay couples are not family appropriate, or...

If it is a writen policy they should have been given the option of turning the shirt out OR a refund. If it was really a rule, his shirt should have been noticed while/before paying.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Edited for







syndrome


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

The First Amendment doesn't just protect people from GOVERNMENT censorship. That's a common misconception. The First Amendment states:

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech."

In other words, the Constitution recognized that a "freedom of speech" already exists, and that the government cannot pass a law limiting that already existing freedom of speech. In other words, it would be illegal to pass a law saying "Zoos may remove people who say fuck," because that would be a law abridging the freedom of speech.

Yes, I am legally protected if I have a conversation inside a gambling house, criticizing gambling. No, I may not "shout" it -- as I already said before: "as long as you're not screaming it." There's a difference between shouting/screaming and speaking in a normal tone of voice or wearing a t-shirt.

Breastfeeding is not protected by some special law (except in some states). It doesn't need to be. I have the right to breastfeed any where in this country, even though there is no national law saying so.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Yes, I am legally protected if I have a conversation inside a gambling house, criticizing gambling. No, I may not "shout" it -- as I already said before: "as long as you're not screaming it." There's a difference between shouting/screaming and speaking in a normal tone of voice or wearing a t-shirt.
That is just not true. You could not stand in the doorway of a casino and say in a normal tone of voice "gambling is evil" to every person who walked in. Well, you could, but they would have every right to ask you to leave. You can have a conversation with your friend about it, but if the management or security feels that it is disrupting other people, they can ask you to leave. McDonalds can make you leave if you stand inside and say "meat is murder" to everyone who walks in. They can ask you to leave it you sit by yourself mumbling "meat is murder." They are private establishments, and there is no protection for freedom of speech while on their premises. Like K'Mama pointed out, it's the same thing here on MDC. MDC has every right to set rules about what may be said or not said, and ban those who violate the rules.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

No one has to publish all submitted writing, including publishers of books and online message boards. That is completely different from an employee forcibly removing a person (or threatening to) who enters an establishment and exercises their freedom of speech. Yes, I can tell McDonald's customers that they shouldn't buy the food. An employee can exercize their freedom of speech and tell me "I wish you wouldn't say that," but if they forcibly remove me, then THEY have broken the law.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
No one has to publish all submitted writing, including publishers of books and online message boards. That is completely different from an employee forcibly removing a person (or threatening to) who enters an establishment and exercises their freedom of speech. Yes, I can tell McDonald's customers that they shouldn't buy the food. An employee can exercize their freedom of speech and tell me "I wish you wouldn't say that," but if they forcibly remove me, then THEY have broken the law.

They probably couldn't forcibly remove you themselves because you could charge them with assault. They'd be well within their rights, though, to call the police to come and remove you from the premises.

As other posters have stated, the First Amendment (the entire Bill of Rights, actually) only applies to government action. It actually didn't even originally apply to the states - only to the federal government. Supreme Court jurisprudence changed that.

When you're on private property, you're subject to the private property owner's rules unless those rules are in conflict with a law that is actually meant to govern the interactions between one private citizen and another.


----------



## jannan (Oct 30, 2002)

they didn't have to give your money back. i can't believe anyone with children would let them put on a shirt with immitation chinese writing and the work "fuck". it is not appropriate for the zoo. if i would 've seen it , i just wouldv'e thought you were ignorant.

and please there is no comparrison with breast feeding and wearing the word fuck.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

The zoo is a public place where there are children.

I feel they were correct in asking you to leave if your DS was going to wear that shirt. I however would have offered you another shirt or asked you to put a jacket on over his shirt or turn it inside out. I would have been offended to see that on a child's T-shirt.

I worked for a family in college who had glass tumblers with what appeared to be Hebrew letterings on the side. When a person drank from the glass, turning it upside down, it read, (-*words to the effect telling you what to do with yourself next time you are alone*-). However they used these tumblers only for the "big people" parties they had...i.e., no grandchildren around.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

I'm not sure what the legal answer is about refunding the money. I just think it would be the _right_ thing for them to do. I also think the guard could have given them a chance to remove/ cover/ whatever the offending statement. I say this in part because running a business is not always about being right... sometimes it is about public relations and being smart.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
They'd be well within their rights, though, to call the police to come and remove you from the premises.

The police may not physically remove you without charging you with a crime. Exercizing free speech is not a crime.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
As other posters have stated, the First Amendment (the entire Bill of Rights, actually) only applies to government action.

See my post above.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
When you're on private property, you're subject to the private property owner's rules unless those rules are in conflict with a law that is actually meant to govern the interactions between one private citizen and another.

Like I said, there is NO law saying that I can breastfeed anywhere in the country, and yet I do have this right, and no private property owner can make a "rule" taking that right away from me.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jannan*
and please there is no comparrison with breast feeding and wearing the word fuck.

Except that there are people who think that both are offensive.


----------



## its_our_family (Sep 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zaq001*
:LOL

I know what you mean. My cousin just got a tattoo with japanese letters...I can't remember what they mean. I asked him, are you sure that means what you think it means....It could be japanese for jack ass you know.









T but a friend of mine was in Japan for about 7 months. She writes, reads and speaks fluantly. Anyway, she gets on the plane to come home and this big ol body builder gets on. She said he looked all rough and tough and he had this big "mean" looking tattoo. As she looked closer she started to chuckle. It was a japanese caligraphy of the word SCHOOL!!! :LOL LOL


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

The con-law professor I just asked about this assures me there is no guarantee of free speech on private property.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

When you asked the question, did you distinguish between a private residence and a place of public accomodation (like a restaurant)?

I'd like to hear what a civil liberties specialist (like an ACLU lawyer) would say.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

I told him the whole story, in the OP's words.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

The attorney I asked also agreed that there is no right of free speech in this situation. And yes, I was very specific about the place and type of speech we were talking about. I'll bet you could call the ACLU and get a quick answer. If you do, please share because I'd love to hear it too.


----------



## its_our_family (Sep 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
They can't throw you out for verbally saying "fuck" (as long as you're not screaming it), and they can't throw you out for your shirt "saying" it either.

Actually in a lot of cities around the country it is still against the "law" to spit in public, wear a hat inside a public building, and a lot of other things that seem "silly" to us now.

Quote:

It's a free country.
Yeah, I don't think its nearly as free as we have been lead to believe.

On to the OP. I do not agree with the shirt at all on many levels. But the real issue is the reaction of the "security guard". If it isn't a written rule where everyone has access then I don't see how they can enforce it. Of course, my dh got a 90.00 ticket from a city cop for an unwritten law and there was NO getting out of it!

I also have to say that if any person of any age were to come to my house as a guest with that shirt on they would be asked to take it off. We don't talk like that in our house and your rights to wear it in my home is a moot point.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Yes, many local laws have been passed limiting the freedom of speech, and they are all unconstitutional.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
The police may not physically remove you without charging you with a crime. Exercizing free speech is not a crime.[/b]

Private property owners have the right to have ejected anyone they like for any reason so long as that reason does not violate the law (racial discrimination would be an example). The police can absolutely remove you because once you refuse to leave private property at the owner's request you *are* committing a crime - you're trespassing.



*Quote:*

Like I said, there is NO law saying that I can breastfeed anywhere in the country, and yet I do have this right, and no private property owner can make a "rule" taking that right away from me.
In most states (if not all), breastfeeding women are specifically protected by law from ejection from private property (if the ejection is simply for the reason that they are breastfeeding). It's an entirely different animal than First Amendment protection.

We could debate this until the cows come home. The only thing I can recommend is picking up a constitutional law treatise. It gets a little confusing, but the protections on public and private property just are not the same.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Yes, many local laws have been passed limiting the freedom of speech, and they are all unconstitutional.

One thing to keep in mind: It's been held time and again that freedom of speech is not absolute. There are classes of speech, some more protected than others; some with no protection at all.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

There was a case in the 1960's, Cohen -v- California, in which a "hippy"-type was walking around the courthouse hallway wearing a denim jacket which had a message on the back, "F*** the Draft!" There were women and small children present.

The right to free speech is not absolute, the Supreme Court ruled.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Private property owners have the right to have ejected anyone they like for any reason so long as that reason does not violate the law (racial discrimination would be an example). The police can absolutely remove you because once you refuse to leave private property at the owner's request you are committing a crime - you're trespassing.
I have worked in many a law office in my previous life (pre-baby), and dragonfly is absolutely correct about private vs. public "free speech."


----------



## dynamicdoula (Jun 11, 2004)

Quote:

What if they made a rule that all females have to wear dresses? What if they say I can't breastfeed? Or that if I do I have to make sure that not a speck of skin shows? And what about that pro-peace shirt?
Now wait a minute... different places that we pay to go to definitely have dress codes. Go to a fancy restaraunt, you'll be thrown out for wearing flip flops and jean jacket... Go to an opera, they won't let you in without the right attire. How is it unreasonable to expect a family friendly t-shirt in a family environment?

Go ahead and call the ACLU and see how much sympathy you get from the public! lol We do have a right to free speech and I see your point _totally_ , but let's not escape our common sense. Would you sue that fancy restaruant, knowing full well ahead of time that they expected a certain type of dress? Would you be the person to go in there, for the sake of making an unnecessary and expensive stink, just to make a point?

Let's not waste the court, or the people's time with this one... I think the mother should have been offered an opportunity to change the shirt or turn it inside out, but that's about all she should have expected... JMO.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
In most states (if not all), breastfeeding women are specifically protected by law from ejection from private property (if the ejection is simply for the reason that they are breastfeeding).

It's definitely not all. I don't think it's even most. But no one has the right to eject you for it anyway.

There's a big difference between having a dress codes that doesn't allow t-shirts at all (because they're not formal enough), and having a rule that allows t-shirts *except for those that say certain things*. The second violates free expression and is a First Amendment issue.


----------



## Dov (Nov 21, 2001)

I'm with Ravin. If it's not a written code, they shouldn't be "forcibly" removing anyone. I also agree with the refund thing... in the absence of any written policy, you should have gotten one.

There's just too much thought-policing going on 'round here and too many ultra-male-mega-rambo-cops wanting to kick some tail to "enforce" the "law." Half the time these morons make the "laws" up as they go along depending on their mood or medication.

Not sure I wouldn't let my 7 yo wear such a shirt but that's me and I wouldn't expect others to adhere to my own sense of appropriateness or whatever simply because they are them and not me. If I saw it on another kid it probably would have made me laugh... and turn to my own kids, "hey lookit the tigers over there...." (pointing in a different direction).







People are too keyed about about unimportant stuff, IMO.


----------



## boysrus (Dec 2, 2001)

Okay, most businesses have a sign saying "We reserve right to refuse service to anybody" or something like that. I think it is implied in most businesses. If the biz feels that you are doing something harmful to their business, they have the right to not do business wit you. If they are not doing biz with you, they hae the right to ask you to leave. If you dont leave, they have the right to call the police, bc you are trespassing.
I am sickened that we live in a society where people think it is okay to let their young children wear inappropriate clothing, esp to a place where there will be a lot of other children


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

There are certain things that are protected; that they can't kick you out for. One is belonging to a minority race. Members of minority races are protected by the 14th amendment. Another is exercizing speech. This is protected by the 1st amendment. Another is breastfeeding. This is a fundamental, universal right that doesn't even need to be written down, because it goes without saying. If you ask me, the others should go without saying, too. These are all protected individual rights that businesses do not have the right to over-rule. I have certain rights, no matter where I go. My rights don't completely disappear when I walk through a gate.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

wow. what a thread.

all I can say is this:

GOOD! I'm glad your son got kicked out. I wouldn't want to have been one of the parents there that day who had to try to explain that shirt to THEIR 7 year old. What poor taste and what a bad example for a kid.


----------



## DesireeH (Mar 22, 2003)

If it were my zoo I would have sent you on your way as well (or gave you the option to change).

Quote:

find it ironic that one of the people who said that the comparison is ridiculous also said something like 'what about other people's right to not have to look at' whatever, because that's the EXACT same thing that some people say about breastfeeding.
The difference is that breastfeeding is of benefit to the baby and a baby needs to eat.

There is NO benefit for anyone seeing a 7 y/o in a foul shirt, especially for the 7 y/o who is wearing it.

Most stores dont have signs on the outside that say "do not walk in here naked" because its just common sense. Its sad that everything has to be "posted" for people to get it.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

For society to function well for everyone, nobody has the "right" to do and say whatever they want. The whole reason the Free Speech ideal works is because most people aren't inclined to yell obscenities and hate speech on street corners.

I just keep going back to what someone said about rights being balanced with responsibility. Just because we "can", or "should be able to", doesn't mean we should.

Obsenities are offensive in the public arena, and since there is absolutely no benefit to wearing such a shirt, I fail to see how a responsible member of society would push this on people and then argue about "rights". Maybe you have the right and maybe you don't, but why not just show some consideration for the rest of society and save the T-shirt for family barbeques where perhaps it will be among a more appreciative audience.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *applejuice*
There was a case in the 1960's, Cohen -v- California, in which a "hippy"-type was walking around the courthouse hallway wearing a denim jacket which had a message on the back, "F*** the Draft!" There were women and small children present.


There were women and small children present?! Off topic, but why do women need more protection from a word like f*uck then men? Why would women being present make wearing a word like that more inapproproate than if it was just men and children present?


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

oh and sorry to be so nitpicky, but "women and children" used in that way is one of my pet peeves.


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

SBF, my husband and I are small business owners, and let me assure you, we absolutely have the right to restrict the types of activities and speech that we allow on our premises. It is not just our misperception that we have this right. It is the law. As a courtesy to our clients, we post a sign in the window that states that certain types of attire and behavior (including cursing) are not allowed in our extablishment, but legally, we needn't even do that. If we feel that someone's attire, speech, or behavior is inappropriate for our establishment and/or infringes on our ability to run a profitable establishment (as long as we're not evicting a person in a wheelchair, for example, because we feel they are blocking hallway), we have an absolute right to request that the person (or party) leave and, if they fail to do so, we can request that the police remove them for trespassing. In the case of a private establishment (even if it does accomodate the public), you *DO*, without a doubt, leave certain rights to free expression at the door. That is a fact, borne out in countless court cases.

Wilma


----------



## pictures_of_lily (Apr 26, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BunnysMomma*
SBF, my husband and I are small business owners, and let me assure you, we absolutely have the right to restrict the types of activities and speech that we allow on our premises. It is not just our misperception that we have this right. It is the law. As a courtesy to our clients, we post a sign in the window that states that certain types of attire and behavior (including cursing) are not allowed in our extablishment, but legally, we needn't even do that. If we feel that someone's attire, speech, or behavior is inappropriate for our establishment and/or infringes on our ability to run a profitable establishment (as long as we're not evicting a person in a wheelchair, for example, because we feel they are blocking hallway), we have an absolute right to request that the person (or party) leave and, if they fail to do so, we can request that the police remove them for trespassing. In the case of a private establishment (even if it does accomodate the public), you *DO*, without a doubt, leave certain rights to free expression at the door. That is a fact, borne out in countless court cases.

Wilma

ITA, and the posters who are saying otherwise are extremely misinformed on this. My family owns a business, and it is absolutely our right to remove people we do not want there because of their actions or words or attire, and that is not in violation of freedom of speech or of any other rights. The very idea that people could own a business and then be compelled to allow perfect strangers to come in and say, do, and wear whatever they please is ridiculous. We own our business with our money and we make the decisions. Your business, you run it your way, and the zoo did not care to have that shirt in there, and that is their right.


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Maybe I should clarify a little...
While my family has NO PROBLEM with words and phrases like that, perhaps I can see why some parents would. The problem I had was the way the zoo handled it. The "rent-a-cop" guy told me straight out that they didn't have a written policy about so-called "obscene" shirts. He also couldn't (or wouldn't) produce such a thing when I asked to see it. Second, I was NOT offered the option to turn the shirt inside out (not that I asked, since I don't feel we should have to). And third, when I asked for a refund of our money, I was denied that as well.

In addition, I CERTAINLY don't mean the shirt as anything culturally offensive !! For that I apologize profusely !! I have many Chinese and Chinese-American friends, and I love them dearly. And, by the way, none of them are offended culturally because they know I and my family don't mean it that way.


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Maybe I should clarify a little...
The "rent-a-cop" guy told me straight out that they didn't have a written policy about so-called "obscene" shirts. He also couldn't (or wouldn't) produce such a thing when I asked to see it. Second, I was NOT offered the option to turn the shirt inside out (not that I asked, since I don't feel we should have to). And third, when I asked for a refund of our money, I was denied that as well.

I don't doubt that the security guard was less than pleasant to you. But legally, the zoo was not required to have a written policy on obscene shirts, offer you a chance to rectify the situation, or give you a refund. It would have been nice if they had, but they don't have to.

Wilma


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Shann, i honestly have to ask you this ~ why don't you + your family have a problem with such language? what led to that decision or mindset?


----------



## Electra375 (Oct 2, 2002)

Personally, I think it was in bad taste to allow your child to wear a shirt with profanity on it regardless of how hard you have to look to see it. If your son wore it to school, would he have been asked to turn it around or be sent home? Yes... so wouldn't it be wise to keep his favorite shirt for home use only?

The Zoo should have refunded your money though. And I'd find if the zoo has a dress code somewhere in the fine print for argument sake.

My son has a favorite shirt "Grave Digger" monster truck. I find the skulls offensive and I do not allow him to wear it to school or to the store, only to play around the house.

And we wonder what has happend to "values" and "morals". I'm sorry, but I do not feel that profanity should be acceptable in public -- ever! Whatever happen to just being NICE!


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *klothos*
Shann, i honestly have to ask you this ~ why don't you + your family have a problem with such language? what led to that decision or mindset?

Umm, kind of a strange question because it assumes your opinion is the default and any differing opinion needs explanation. Lots of families don't have a problem with such language. My family doesn't and dh's family doesn't. When we have kids, we won't have a problem with our kids expressing themselves however best suits them (their decision). Of coruse, no name calling (including names like idiot and dummy), and of course, there are approriate and inappropriate times for different kinds of language. It is how I was raised, and I never had a problem with this upbringing (i.e. never got in trouble at school cause and never shocked grandma cause my parents taught and modeled different kinds of language behavior for different situations).

I think crusing can be wonderfully expressive. Read modern poetry. Read James Joyce. (both full of "such language") Swear words can do real communicative work.

I see nothing wrong with the OP letting her son wear a f*ck this s*it t-shirt. However, the appropriate/inappropriate times for different kinds of language use is an important lesson. If you dress and talk differently than other people are dressing and talking for a certain occasion, you will be shunned. Non-conformity is not free, there is a price you pay for not conforming. This time it was being kicked out of the zoo. And everyone has to decide what is worth it

The point is, I think, that you can't just do whatever you want and expect to be accepted and tolerated (not in this uptight country). In fact, you can do everything "right" and still offend someone, cause americans are very offendable (just watch when a telemarketer tries to call me Miss or Mrs). So the OP should use this opportunity to help her son see that if the t-shirt is important enough to him to wear in public despite that 70% of the peopel he meets will find the words objectionable, then fine, but there will be consequences. Just as there are consequences anytime you do/wear/say what the majority of people wouldn't do/wear/say in a particular situation.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
The second violates free expression and is a First Amendment issue.

Again, only if the person doing the "violating" is acting on behalf of the government.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
There are certain things that are protected; that they can't kick you out for. One is belonging to a minority race. Members of minority races are protected by the 14th amendment.

The 14th amendment protects members of minority races from discrimination at the hands of the state governments. It reads (in part), "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; *nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws*."

Protection from discrimination for minorities at the state of private parties is covered by the Civil Rights Act.



*Quote:*

Another is breastfeeding. This is a fundamental, universal right that doesn't even need to be written down, because it goes without saying.
Well, it *should* be considered a fundamental, universal right, but it's not. ("Fundamental" right has a specific meaning in constitutional law jurisprudence and breastfeeding isn't lumped in with other fundamental rights). Technically, in states that don't have legislation protecting them, women can still be ejected from private property for openly breastfeeding. They could, theoretically, still be arrested for public indecency if they show their breasts in some states. As long as there is no national breastfeeding legislation protecting us, that is the case.

It seems that there's enough awareness now, though (or at least a certain level of decency), that women aren't routinely experiencing this.

With all due respect, sbf, it seems that you have a basic misunderstanding of constitutional law. It's not surprising - the language is often ambiguous. If you have an opportunity to take a course in consitutional law, it's definitely worth the experience.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
There were women and small children present?! Off topic, but why do women need more protection from a word like f*uck then men? Why would women being present make wearing a word like that more inapproproate than if it was just men and children present?

:LOL I think it had a lot to do with it being 1971.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

At a forum where Homschooling is so popular I'm not sure why it matters if a shirt would or wouldn't be allowed at school. Many of us partly HS specifically to keep the school influence out of our kids lives, yet here it is being used as a a good example. Isn't that ironic, LOL. I mean really, do you all that send your kids to school dress them only in school appropriate attire 24/7? I know schools that don't allow baseball caps. So, does that set some sort of precedent?

I really don't see how what may or may not be appropriate for school has any bering on this.

And I don't see any of this having to do with "family friendly". And it's up to me to decide what is appropriate for my family.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
Technically, in states that don't have legislation protecting them, women can still be ejected from private property for openly breastfeeding.

That is simply not true.

There are some things that don't require laws. Like the right to breastfeed. Or the right to breathe.

Here's another thing to think about. If the free speech clause of the First Amendment only applies to the government and not to businesses, then the same would have to be true of the "free exercise of religion" clause of the First Amendment. Should the First Amendment protect someone who wears traditional religious garb to the grocery store? If it does, then it also protects free speech in a zoo.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Shann, I just wanted to say that I think you handled yourself wonderfully in your response.

I sure don't agree with what you put on your kid, and given the majority of posters here who also felt that way, I expected you to react defensively and aggressively. Instead, you stuck to the topic at hand and your original concerns.

I just want you to know that I appreciate that very much! Shows a lot of maturity.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

I think you should have gotten your money back

BUT

I totally agree you should have been asked to leave; or have you son change.

I'd be upset to be at a ZOO with my kids and se a 7yo in such a shirt!!! (I'd not like it on an adult either -- not at the Zoo, this is not a punk rock concert).

I am all for freedom of speech -- and your son is free to wear it -- but the Zoo is free to ask you to leave.

I question why ANYONE would buy a shirt for a 7 yo with such language on it!!

Aimee


----------



## vermonter (Jan 6, 2002)

sbf said:


> That is simply not true.
> 
> There are some things that don't require laws. Like the right to breastfeed. Or the right to breathe.
> 
> Actually, Vermont just passed a law a couple of years ago giving women the right to breastfeed in public places. I believe Colorado just did the same.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

The REAL issue that I see here is that they took her money in exchange for a service (enjoying the zoo) and then did not give her the service. That is dishonest.

For example:

Quote:

Would you sue that fancy restaruant, knowing full well ahead of time that they expected a certain type of dress? Would you be the person to go in there, for the sake of making an unnecessary and expensive stink, just to make a point?
They wouldn't be seated! Often, fancy dress restaurants will have a jacket available for men to wear if needed or they just would not be accepting them as a customer. Once they had been seated, and ordered, if they were asked to leave (having not changed clothes or behavior) I would hope that they would not be charged.

Same thing. The guard was on a power trip (to not even allow them to turn it inside out, take it off, cover it up, etc...).


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

T

Quote:

There are some things that don't require laws. Like the right to breastfeed.
Except that as long as it is not legally protected, the store/shop/whatever owner has the right to call the police and have you forcibly removed and figure it out later. Has there been ANY success at suing in a state that did not have specific protection?


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Here's another thing to think about. If the free speech clause of the First Amendment only applies to the government and not to businesses, then the same would have to be true of the "free exercise of religion" clause of the First Amendment. Should the First Amendment protect someone who wears traditional religious garb to the grocery store? If it does, then it also protects free speech in a zoo.
Religion, like gender or race, is specifically protected by law, so a private establishment cannot discriminate based on religion.

I'm honestly a little surprised that the whole free speech/private establishment thing is being debated. I thought that it has always been pretty obvious that free speech is not protected on private property. Why do you think picketers have to stand off property? Even if they're not saying a word, just wearing a t-shirt that says "Safeway sucks, don't shop here", Safeway has the right to ask them to leave, and the police will enforce the trespassing by making them stand outside.

My dad is a small business owner, and he can have the police remove anyone at any time if they won't leave when he asks them to. To be honest, even though there are protected classes (religion, race, disability, etc.), he could tell the police that he just didn't want them there, doesn't even have to specify a reason, and they would have to leave. (This has happened before - he's gotten some loony tunes trying to sit around his shop for too long and acting just a little too bizarre.)

And if free speech is permitted no matter what you are saying or where you are, then why would the volume of your voice matter?

Add California to the list of states that have laws specifically allowing breastfeeding.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Maybe I should clarify a little...
While my family has NO PROBLEM with words and phrases like that, perhaps I can see why some parents would. The problem I had was the way the zoo handled it. The "rent-a-cop" guy told me straight out that they didn't have a written policy about so-called "obscene" shirts. He also couldn't (or wouldn't) produce such a thing when I asked to see it. Second, I was NOT offered the option to turn the shirt inside out (not that I asked, since I don't feel we should have to). And third, when I asked for a refund of our money, I was denied that as well.

In addition, I CERTAINLY don't mean the shirt as anything culturally offensive !! For that I apologize profusely !! I have many Chinese and Chinese-American friends, and I love them dearly. And, by the way, none of them are offended culturally because they know I and my family don't mean it that way.

Thank you for your response Shann. I would like to comment on a couple of things. With so much aggression and anger in the world...I would ask if you could please refrain from putting anymore angry or aggression based expressions out there such as Fuck this. While I may not agree with your desision to allow your children to use profanity, it is indeed your desision. What you choose to 'put' out there in terms of energy affects everyone. Swearing is one thing but aggression and defiance creates anger based conflict and doesn't the world have enough of that already?

There has been some discussion of using profane words in literature. This tshirt is not eloquent or intelligient profanity...it is racist and vulgar and aggressive. If it was in the least artistic or creative I doubt anyone would have issue.

Your close Asian friends understand who you are as a person but a stranger who is Asian doesn't. I would really hate to see you child injured for this.


----------



## greymama (May 30, 2003)

I always get a chuckle when people quote the Bill of Rights and Constitution as blanket statements that apply to our lives today. The writers of these documents were NOT all knowing omnipotent beings. I seriously doubt they thought the right to free speech would include 7-year-old children wearing "f--- this s---" t-shirts. More likely, they were enabling people to criticize the King of England, ie "King George is not so Enlightened." The Constitution is a beautiful document, but the times they are a changin'

By the way, Le Leche League has a web site for state by state legislation on Breastfeeding laws. http://www.lalecheleague.org/LawBills.html
Check out Maryland, they don't tax breastfeeding supplies, how cool is that!


----------



## boysrus (Dec 2, 2001)

I was saddened bythe term "rent a cop" too. To me, it is very disrespectful, and perhaps indicative of the OPs attitude.
As for the guard, we live in a world of road rage, school shootings, and city bomings. If I saw a family who felt that it was okay for a young child to wer such a shirt, I would be extremely concerned about what other actions that family would do.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

anyone that would injure someone over a statement on a t shirt has some serious issues and should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.

no excuses.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

vermonter said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sbf*
> ...


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
anyone that would injure someone over a statement on a t shirt has some serious issues and should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.

no excuses.

Of course. That doesn't really help the injured child, though.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
Of course. That doesn't really help the injured child, though.

Yea, you have to be careful that you're not asking for it, right?

"Was she asking for it?
Did she ask you twice"


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

double post


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

I really wish we could seperate this into two distict issues (with different threads perhaps).

1) The rights of the child/family (to stay at the zoo/be given a refund)

2) The parenting decisions behind allowing that attire.

It is quite clear to me that you can support one without the other.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

m


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
Yea, you have to be careful that you're not asking for it, right?

"Was she asking for it?
Did she ask you twice"


Exactly!! This whole train of thought reminds of the rape and dress thread. Apparently we all are supposed to dress and act a certain way because other people might take it as an invitation to harm us.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

In a world where wearing a certain color in the wrong part of town can get you beat to death I think anything is up for grabs along those lines. KWIM?
That level of acceptance is very depressing to me. Should gays also pretend to be straight if they are in an unaccepting community?


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TiredX2*
I really wish we could seperate this into two distict issues (with different threads perhaps).

1) The rights of the child/family (to stay at the zoo/be given a refund)

2) The parenting decisions behind allowing that attire.

It is quite clear to me that you can support one without the other.

Right. I'm all for #2, but not for #1 (though I think the zoo "should" have given refunds and/or allowed the child to turn shirt inside out, they didn't have a legal obligation to do so)


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

oh yes many people with that GLBTQ would just be in the closet, that way they wouldn't have to "deal with it". Obviously the same intolerance can be said of some people in the majority. See the other thread for more on this one.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[\......


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TiredX2*
That level of acceptance is very depressing to me. Should gays also pretend to be straight if they are in an unaccepting community?











Depends on whether they want to suffer the consequences. It's not about theory at that moment, it's about reality.

The same with wearing an obscene shirt to a place that generally caters to kids. The reality is that it's probably going to be against the policies of that particular establishment, and people need to use good judgement. Whether the OP thinks her son's shirt is adorable is beside the point; surely she knows that the majority doesn't and that there will at some point be consequences for that. That's reality.

Freedoms must be balanced by responsibilities or society will not function.

*Disclaimer: I'm gay-friendly and I don't advocate beating up 7-year-olds over the slogans on their shirts.*

Wilma


----------



## China white (Mar 29, 2004)

People here keep refering to the fact that the boy was allowed into the zoo in the first place, so the family is entitled to a refund. I'm betting the cashier didn't see the child's shirt - I know when I go to the movies, museum, etc, the cashier is talking to me, not looking at my children, let alone what they are wearing. Just and observation.............







:


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

China white said:


> QUOTE]
> 
> Just curious China white, where did you get the quote on your sig?


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
A number of states have done this - in some cases specifically giving women the right to breastfeed "anywhere they have the right to be" and in some cases just exempting them from indecent exposure laws. They've done it because otherwise women could, in theory, be subject to prosecution simply for breastfeeding.

No, that is not correct. We don't need states to GIVE us the right to breastfeed. We already have it. When states pass such laws, it is only to CLARIFY a right that already exists.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

I don't get bringing gay issues into this.

Sort of the difference between being a gay couple or wearing a tshirt depicting gay sex.

I support gays being gay in public but I don't want to have sex acts (I'm thinking stick figures in vulgar positions because I saw it somewhere but I can't remember)

The one is freedom, the other is vulgar.

I'm more into discussing this from a parenting perspective because as much as I'm uncomfortible with authortative types I don't understand who would buy a tshirt with the "F word" in a child's size.

BTW: I'm no prude. I have been known to cuss and I don't give my children too much guff for cussing but they are *discouraged* gently and they don't go around cussing off security guards or wearing vulgar tshirts.

Not even the teenagers.

DB


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

The point is that not everyone feels it's vulgar.


----------



## nikirj (Oct 1, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
No, that is not correct. We don't need states to GIVE us the right to breastfeed. We already have it. When states pass such laws, it is only to CLARIFY a right that already exists.

SBF, as nice as it would be, this just isn't true.

Until you are specifically protected (as in the case of no discriminating due to sexual orientation, religion, etc), any private institution has the right to kick you out for any reason. Including breastfeeding.


----------



## QueeTheBean (Aug 6, 2002)

7 seems awfully young for this kind of shirt, I know you weren't asking for opinions, but just thought I'd weigh in.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
I have many Chinese and Chinese-American friends, and I love them dearly. And, by the way, none of them are offended culturally because they know I and my family don't mean it that way.

It's great that your friends and family aren't offended, but if I passed by your son while he was wearing that shirt, I, a stranger, would assume he was a racist. I'm just saying . . .

My husband wears camo. patterend clothes. I hate them. He is a gentle, intelligent, politically liberal man who happens to be interested in British military history. I hate when he wears the camo (I won't go out with him if he does), and try to explain how OTHER people will see him in it bc they don't know him like I do. I mean, it is sad that we judge others by what they are wearing, but we do. Just don't have time to get to know everyone.









ALso,

My DH and I are not religious at all--in fact, in some sense, we are fairly anti-religious. Oh, boy, are there some t-shirts I'd like to wear







, but I am respectful enough of our culture-at-large, that DH and I keep our thoughts to ourselves unless 1) provoked, or 2) in company that we know is "safe".


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Not everyone thinks it vulgar...but how about aggressive? Can we agree that the expression...."FUCK THIS SHIRT" is aggressive?


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
The point is that not everyone feels it's vulgar.

*Most* people feel it is (and the law is on the side of the zoo, so that aspect of the argument has already been resolved), so the question at this point is, knowing that there will be consequences for your actions, are you still willing to take that course of action? And should a child be made the object lesson?

Also, a mother who dresses her child in a shirt with profanities on it knows that the point of the shirt is to be shocking. Should she then complain when people react with shock?

Wilma


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Fuck this Shirt on your own shirt is aggressive?

in what way? I don't see it as such. In fact it's clearly a play on words, that it means Fuck this Shit. And that could be any shit, YK?

now boys are stupid throw rocks at them, I see that as aggresive. It's clearly targeting one group and it is encouraging violence against that group.

Shit could be anything.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

QueenTheBean wrote, "7 seems awfully young for this kind of shirt, I know you weren't asking for opinions, but just thought I'd weigh in."

The OP, Shann, wrote, "Advice and opinions, PLEASE! My son said "Fuck their policies!" and i agreed with him ! LOL !"

She *did* ask for your opinion LOL


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
Fuck this Shirt on your own shirt is aggressive?

in what way? I don't see it as such. In fact it's clearly a play on words, that it means Fuck this Shit. And that could be any shit, YK?

now boys are stupid throw rocks at them, I see that as aggresive. It's clearly targeting one group and it is encouraging violence against that group.

Shit could be anything.


It didn't say SHIRT it said "Fuck this Shit"


----------



## China white (Mar 29, 2004)

my~hearts~light said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *China white*
> ...


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

I was quoting the PP, what is why I said shirt.


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
"FUCK THIS SHIRT"

Actually, the shirt says "F*ck this sh*t."

Wilma


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Sorry typo!


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Mountain mom dont' worry about it.

Everyone else who keeps posting that the shirt said fuck this shit, not fuck this shirt. I was quoting someone else who made a typo. no biggie.

It doesn't effect any of my post anyway.

Fuck this shit isn't aggressive either, as I posted before.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Ard...What adjective would you use to describe "Fuck this Shit"?

I see it as being aggressive or a dark expression because rarely if ever have I seen anyone merrily singing "fuck this shit" or anyone smiling from ear to ear in positivity stating: "fuck this shit".

I think it is a statement reserved for situations that warrant a strong expression. You loose your keys, f this shit. Your bf sleeps with your husband "f this shit"

You think a asian statement is lame "f this shit".


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
The point is that not everyone feels it's vulgar.

Exactly. I wouldn't bat an eye at a t-shirt that says "F*uck, no matter who was wearing it. There are people who would think the t-shirt disgusting and vulgar as well as people who would think that two men holding hands is disgiusting and vulgar.

Now anologies are always muddy, and this one might be, but I don't think it is COMPLETELY off base to say that telling your kids not to wear clouthes with "f*ck on it because others might treat them badly for it is like telling your kids not to be visibly gay because others might treat them badly for it.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

ya lost me on the last one? I have no idea what this means You think a asian statement is lame "f this shit".

My point, as I made before, is that the word shit in this case could mean anything. It's a fill in the blank, unless you wear it to a political function or something. Then you could see it in context of the event. But in general it's just a statment of angst. There is no inherant aggression since it doesn't mention a specific target.

Just commenting on the statement, I agree that calling that an old chinese proverb is offensive.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

I am not sure that I can agree with that analogy. This is why...you can always take the tshirt off, its not as easy to not be gay. To ask you child to pretend not to be who they are is sending a message that being gay is wrong therefore they are wrong. Asking a child to be sensitive about profanity and asian culture is showing respect.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
ya lost me on the last one? I have no idea what this means You think a asian statement is lame "f this shit".

Yah I was kind of vague on that one. What I mean is that there is asian writing on the shirt that when turned over says fuck this shit. It could be interpreted as meaning that asian = shit or asian statements are to be fucked or if you see this statement Fuck it.

Also I was wanting to here how you would describe the statement Fuck this Shit with an adjective. I used aggressive. What would you use.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
I am not sure that I can agree with that analogy. This is why...you can always take the tshirt off, its not as easy to not be gay. To ask you child to pretend not to be who they are is sending a message that being gay is wrong therefore they are wrong. Asking a child to be sensitive about profanity and asian culture is showing respect.

Yes good point. BUT, you can ask gay men not to hold hands and thus not advertise that they are gay (since it deeply offends some pople) just as you can ask the child to take take off the shirt and not advertise that he thinks "f*ck this Sh*t" is funny and apt (since it deeply offends some people).

Aren't analogies fun


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
Also I was wanting to here how you would describe the statement Fuck this Shit with an adjective. I used aggressive. What would you use.

dissmissive


----------



## siddie (Jan 15, 2003)

Your rights end where mine begin. It is sort of an invisible property line...

I have the right to take my son to the zoo which is a place for families and children to go and have fun, free of profanities and violence. If I take my son to a rock concert, I can pretty much assume there will be profanities and other young adult behaviors which may or may not include consumption of alcohol or other recreational drugs. I have different expectations if I take a trip to say Disneyland or a trip to Las Vegas.

Your choice of clothing says a great deal about you. People will judge you first on how you are dressed. Oftentimes it is the ONLY impresssion people on the street will have of you.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

To me its all about respect. I have an analogy too. How about the gay men that do censor there physicality when around certain people out of respect. Or the extended Bfer who does not bf their child in front of certain family members because they will feel uncomfortable thus perhaps instilling that discomfort on the child.

I censor myself around certain people and I do not feel that I am limiting myself. Quite the contrary. To offer respect is to recieve it. If I do something (such as discuss environment impact of the oil and gas industry in front of my oil and gas employed family) that is out of place and not at the correct time; it goes into deaf ears.

The audience for that tshirt was all wrong.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

yeah, I see the whole gay analogy as applicable because sadly many people do feel that being gay is a choice. So they do feel just as you can take off a shirt you can decide to be hetero. And eveyrone here knows I do not agree with that!

as far as adjectives,

angst /aNst/
· n. a profound feeling of generalized anxiety or dread.
- DERIVATIVES angsty adj.
- ORIGIN 1920s: from Ger., 'fear'.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Then I wonder...Is a seven year old mature enough to know what angst is?


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I'm just cracking up at how many times the words "f*ck" and "sh*t" have been used in this thread...I'm pretty sure it is okay, since we aren't directing them at people...but I may have to ask about it, lol.


----------



## PaganScribe (Feb 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siddie*
Your rights end where mine begin. It is sort of an invisible property line...

But no one has the right to not be offended. There is no way that I can see that a child wearing this shirt violates ANYONE'S rights. No way.

Not to say that I don't agree that the owners of the zoo had the right to ask him to leave. But certainly, no one has the right not to be offended.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

yeah, I thought so too Piglet.

Mountain Mom, I'm sure it would depend on the 7 year old. But I dont' really see why it matters if a 7 year old understood the word angst, since this 40 year old was the one using the word. They'd likely choose a different word to describe the shirt. Like funny.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

Aw piglet, fuck that shit!


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Kama :LOL

Paganscribe!!! ITA!!


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

I say "fuck this shit" (can we really say it?! whoo hoo







), but NEVER aggressively. Always with mild esaperation (sp). Mostly dissmissively. And usually with eyebrows raised and mouth half-smiling (in that this-world-is-crazy way).


----------



## Raven (Dec 15, 2001)

what an interesting thread!!

my opinion:


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

I got your points Mama and Ard.

Kama you crack me up.


----------



## mountain (Dec 12, 2001)

Wow I just read this whole thread.

I think I may not know anything about free speech at all now


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

Interesting Thread! I think that the Zoo was well within their rights to ask you to leave. Now, if I saw someone wearing a shirt that said "fuck this shit" (boy that DOES feel good







) I would not be offened. Maybe not the best choice on a small child, but to each their own. But this shirt was not offensive, IT WAS RACIST. That would bug me. How did this mother handle the Security Guard? Did she just right into being offensive? Did she get in his face and say "fuck the rules"? Did she give him option to give them a chance to make changes. Maybe he did not feel threatened by the shirt, but by the way that the family responded to the request.

Reminds me of the time I was working at the Oregon Mus. of Science and Industry - some teenager came in with a shirt on that said "sorry silly ***** ,dicks are for chicks". My co-worker refused to sell him tickets, and away he was sent. He might have been the biggest gay activist on the planet, but would a gay person have known that?


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68*
For society to function well for everyone, nobody has the "right" to do and say whatever they want. The whole reason the Free Speech ideal works is because most people aren't inclined to yell obscenities and hate speech on street corners.

I just keep going back to what someone said about rights being balanced with responsibility. Just because we "can", or "should be able to", doesn't mean we should.

Obsenities are offensive in the public arena, and since there is absolutely no benefit to wearing such a shirt, I fail to see how a responsible member of society would push this on people and then argue about "rights". Maybe you have the right and maybe you don't, but why not just show some consideration for the rest of society and save the T-shirt for family barbeques where perhaps it will be among a more appreciative audience.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Maybe I should clarify a little...
While my family has NO PROBLEM with words and phrases like that, perhaps I can see why some parents would. The problem I had was the way the zoo handled it. The "rent-a-cop" guy told me straight out that they didn't have a written policy about so-called "obscene" shirts. He also couldn't (or wouldn't) produce such a thing when I asked to see it. Second, I was NOT offered the option to turn the shirt inside out (not that I asked, since I don't feel we should have to). And third, when I asked for a refund of our money, I was denied that as well.

In addition, I CERTAINLY don't mean the shirt as anything culturally offensive !! For that I apologize profusely !! I have many Chinese and Chinese-American friends, and I love them dearly. And, by the way, none of them are offended culturally because they know I and my family don't mean it that way.


Personally, I think that if you chose to stick a seven year old in a shirt with profanity, you take your chances in getting treated like that. Don't do something so socially irresponsible and then complain when you get treated like someone who is socially irresponsible.

Just my opinion.........


----------



## Justice2 (Mar 18, 2003)

WOW. A 7 year old, huh. That's pretty impressive.

About your rights at the zoo...The Bill of Rights, specifically

Quote:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or *abridging the freedom of speech*, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
was written so that the people could speak out against their government without fear of persecution. Here is a quote from NARA (The National Archives Experience)

Quote:

During the debates on the adoption of the Constitution, its opponents repeatedly charged that the Constitution as drafted would open the way to tyranny by the central government. Fresh in their minds was the memory of the British violation of civil rights before and during the Revolution. They demanded a "bill of rights" that would spell out the immunities of individual citizens. Several state conventions in their formal ratification of the Constitution asked for such amendments; others ratified the Constitution with the understanding that the amendments would be offered.
It really irritates me that every tom, dick and jane thinks that they can say what they want, when they want and it's ok because it's _protected by my first amendment rights_, when it's simply not.


----------



## boysrus (Dec 2, 2001)

ok, I am feeling totally stupid and unPC, but I dont undertand how the shirt is racist. I am not being argumentative, I am truly ignorant about it.
Please explain


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
Exactly!! This whole train of thought reminds of the rape and dress thread. Apparently we all are supposed to dress and act a certain way because other people might take it as an invitation to harm us.

Give me a break. NO ONE is saying that. What many of us are saying is that anyone who wears something that brings with it the likelihood that someone will be provoked to aggression should be prepared to meet that aggression head on. Why? Not because the aggression is right or even excusable, but because it's a good possibility that it just might occur.

A 7-year-old child is NOT capable of effectively dealing with that aggression. So, IMO, it's totally irresponsible to put them in a position where they might have to.

It's the same reason I wouldn't take my child to a World Bank/IMF protest around here. Not because the police would be in the right if they reacted to our protests with violence but because it's pretty likely to occur.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
No, that is not correct. We don't need states to GIVE us the right to breastfeed. We already have it. When states pass such laws, it is only to CLARIFY a right that already exists.


Like I said, sbf, you and I are in two completely different realms. You're looking at the "in an ideal world" situation and I'm looking at the reality of a world where there are laws governing individual behavior.


----------



## HollyBearsMom (May 13, 2002)

"That level of acceptance is very depressing to me. Should gays also pretend to be straight if they are in an unaccepting community?"

This got me thinking about what happened at Disney







: about 8 years ago:

We got to Disney and my husband was wearing a red shirt. When we entered at the main gate my husband was asked if he would like a free t-shirt. When we asked why he stated that this was gay pride weekend and the groups would all be wearing red-shirts so if it made my husband uncomfortable they would offer him a free MM t-shirt since this had not been a publicly advertised event. We were both surprised and shocked that a) they just assumed he was straight and b) assumed we might complain if my husband figured it out later. We couldn't imagine that they asked every individal man in red or man in red with a women but they must have. It was just so bizarre


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
anyone that would injure someone over a statement on a t shirt has some serious issues and should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.

no excuses.

I agree with this.

However, my brother was in Germany visiting Dachau (a Nazi concentration camp) three years ago and a guy showed up wearing a t-shirt with a swastika on it. My brother and his friends told him in no uncertain terms that if he didn't take off the shirt, they would take it off of him. Sure it would have been wrong for them to do it but there are some "wrongs" which have moral justification. My brother knew full well that he could end up in a German prison for doing what he was prepared to do but he really didn't care - he felt that the price to be paid would be worth it. He refuses to be silent over an issue that so many conspired upon in silence and secrecy.

DISCLAIMER: NOT COMPARING THE TEXT ON THE OP'S SON'S SHIRT TO A SWASTIKA!!!!!!

My feeling on the whole thing is this: there are many things which are our "right" to do. Go ahead and do them. But an adult making these types of decisions is one thing, a child being put in the position of possibly having to pay the consequences for something that they don't fully understand is another.

Another woman put it so well, something about there is a difference between rights and responsibilities - there's a lot of chatter about rights but not a lot about responsibilities. The responsibility is ultimately to the child to make sure that they don't put themselves in these types of positions until they are old enough to fully comprehend the consequences.

That said, I really think your money should have been refunded...


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

I think the responsability is on the people that are offended by a shirt to not use it as an excuse for violence.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Actually I remember hearing that it is against the law in Germany to wear nazi stuff, right?! They restrict free speech in that area (though they are all good with nudity and curse words







)

I could be wrong, but I remember hearing that. So no nee dto rip some guys shirt off, just call the cops and have him arrested.

The hoochie clouths anology is false because women DO NOT get raped or sexually attacked because of the clouthes they wear. Sexual assault is about power - women who are in a powerless situation get attacked. Believe me, boys in jr. high left the short skirt wearing popular girls alone and grabbed the butts/said inappropriate things to the less popular girls (no matter what they are wearing - me in baggy jeans and prairie skirts) who they could harrass with impunity.

Fun, all over the place thread this is. Every topic under teh sun I think will fit in here some place


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Keep in mind that the whole violence issue is hypothetical in this situation.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

No, I'm not talking about the way it would be ideally. I'm talking about the way it is in reality.

This is from the LLL site:

_"Mothers have a right to breastfeed where they go with their baby, even if that is out in public. It does not matter whether the mother goes to a public or a private place, or even whether they are in a state with legislation. No one has the right to tell a mother how to feed her baby, especially a way that increases the risk of illness to both mother and baby! Legislation has been enacted in nearly one-half of the states in the U.S. because they want to clarify this right, and in some cases, provide a remedy for mothers told to stop breastfeeding. It is hoped that legislation will help to change society's attitudes that breastfeeding is something indecent and should not be done in public. Underlying this, is the goal to increase the rates and duration of breastfeeding recognizing that this is an important health choice that must be encouraged.

&#8230;

"It is important to remember that women have a right to breastfeed in public whether there is a law or not. The purpose of legislation is NOT to legalize it, but to clarify the fact that women have the right to breastfeed in public, or that it is not a criminal offense, such as indecent exposure. Thus, if you are in a state that does not have legislation, you still have the right to feed your baby where you go."_

The First Amendment does not say "freedom to speak out against the government." It says "freedom of speech." If the framers had meant "freedom to speak out against the government," that's what they would have written. I'm certain they understood the difference and that they phrased the amendment deliberately.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

maybe you missed our lengthy and heated thread on clothing and rape?? Some people do believe that there is a relationship between clothes and rape, which is why I referenced our previous thread.

What we call the swastika has a history dating back a couple thousand years and spanning many different cultures. Until the Natzis appropriated it for themselves and their horrendous plans it was a symbol that represented many different things, none of them evil. My understanding is that there is support by some groups to reclaim the symbol back to it's original meaning. So I wouldn't assume that someone wearing the symbol was a white supremist or natzi supporter.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Keep in mind that the whole violence issue is hypothetical in this situation.

Threatening to remove someones clothing if they don't remove it themselves is not hypothetical. And I do consider it to be an act of violence and intimidation.


----------



## Mollie (Mar 12, 2002)

why would you want your child to wear that shirt? I"m not bashing, I just don't see why you would want to put that message out there?


----------



## momto l&a (Jul 31, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *indie*
I don't know why you would let your kid wear that shirt in the first place.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
maybe you missed our lengthy and heated thread on clothing and rape?? Some people do believe that there is a relationship between clothes and rape, which is why I referenced our previous thread.


Yea, I quit reading that thread because clearly I was in the minority and clearly no one was changing thier belief that hoochie clouthes put girls at risk (if it was only so easy to lesson the risk).

But I did want to note that skimpy clouthes is not like advertising that you are gay in that advertising that you are gay just might invite assault in some places, wearing halter tops won't.

Everyone keeps saying what they'd think of the parents if they saw a 7 year old kid wearing a t-shirt with swear words. I thought about it and realized that swear words are such a non-issue for me that I wouldn't base my opinion at all on that evidence. I can't even say I'd think the parents were laid back or something. For me it would be like making a determination about the parents based on the fact the kid was wearing sandals.

(Not that I wouldn't look at them and put them into some box or other - I need to work on that







: but it would be based on something other than the shirt, maybe haircuts - you can tell a lot about a person based on their hair cut)


----------



## mgmsmommy (Jun 24, 2003)

OK so I get that some of you don't see the shirt as aggressive but would you agree that it is a negative message. I want to see my family giving off positive messages rather than negative. After all there is already so much negativity out there, why add to it?


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[


----------



## MomInFlux (Oct 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mgmsmommy*
After all there is already so much negativity out there, why add to it?











This is what it boils down to for me. Really, I don't care if the kid wears the tee-shirt. I'm not going to be offended by the tee-shirt. But for me and my family, I'm going to do what I can to put positive messages out there in the universe. I'm going to work my hardest to model behavior I want to see in the world, and respect for ones self and others is one of those behaviors.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

I'm sorry maybe it's me. Did I miss the part where the security gaurd ripped the kids shirt off? No, he was asked to leave and rightfully so. In the OP situation violence was not an issue. Another post brought up the issue of violence, I was trying to point that out in order to keep to the topic.

ok so you clearly knew that I wasn't referring to the OP but to another post in this thread and then you imply that you didn't with this "Did I miss the part where the security gaurd ripped the kids shirt off? No, he was asked to leave and rightfully so."

??????????

nevermind.....................


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mgmsmommy*
OK so I get that some of you don't see the shirt as aggressive but would you agree that it is a negative message. I want to see my family giving off positive messages rather than negative. After all there is already so much negativity out there, why add to it?

This is what I have been saying all along. With all the anger and frustration and aggression in the world wouldn't it be so much better if a message of love and hope and peace be offered?

To satisfy the swearers in the crowd...How about this one:

This shit rocks!


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

For the non-swearers:

Bring on the love!


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
What we call the swastika has a history dating back a couple thousand years and spanning many different cultures. Until the Natzis appropriated it for themselves and their horrendous plans it was a symbol that represented many different things, none of them evil. My understanding is that there is support by some groups to reclaim the symbol back to it's original meaning. So I wouldn't assume that someone wearing the symbol was a white supremist or natzi supporter.

I would assume that anyone wearing a swastika to a concentration camp is doing it to incite violence by demonstrating support of the nazi party. I may not assume such a thing if the person is wearing it to a grocery store.

I'm not saying that my brother was right to confront the guy. But the other guy was showing a blatant disrespect to hundreds of people, many of them actively and emotionally mourning the loss of their loved ones. I think my brother did the right thing. Technically (or should I say "legally") it might not have been (didn't know about the German law that forbids swastikas, have to check on that one!) but morally I think it was. Perhaps some grown man whose entire family was wiped out in the holocaust didn't have to see someone wearing a swastika that day because of what my brother did.


----------



## Momtwice (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kama'aina mama*
Hhmm... I find it interesting that everyone is worked up about the word fuck and no one cares about the intrinsic cultural insensitivity. I have mixed feelings about you being forced to leave. They probably do 'reserve the right to deny service' blah blah blah... and the shirt was indecent by some standards. An opportunity to turn it inside out or a refund should have been offered. IMO a business has the right, within legal limits, to insist that you not destroy the atmosphere on which heir livlihood depends.

ITA and I feel the "Chinese" part borders on hate speech and is definitely culturally insensitive. Abercrombie and Fitch loves to sell shirts that make fun of cultural stereotypes, pedophilia, and other lovely things.

I am thankful for the ACLU, but to me the idea of parents suing for the rights of their 7 year old to wear clothing with the F-word is a joke.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Since he wasn't asked I guess we will never know.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*

To satisfy the swearers in the crowd...How about this one:

This shit rocks!

Hey, you're cute









How about: F*ckin'-AThis Sh*t Rocks!!"


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

\


----------



## QueeTheBean (Aug 6, 2002)

Despite an interesting debate, I do keep wondering if this is a joke.

I mean 7 is a LITTLE KID--really. I, myself swear like a sailor







: , but a 7 year old? 7???

The cultural part aside for a minute: I have an honest question--NOT meant to be flip-----but what, exactly, kind of "shit" does a 7 year old want to "fuck"? That is to say, what experiences has this 2nd grader had that make him want to "rage against the machine"??







:

My DS will be 6 in a few weeks & the angriest he gets is when his brother knocks down his lego tower. Trying to imagine him saying "fuck this shit"














(which I have, indeed, been reading as "shirt" until a few minutes ago)


----------



## Britishmum (Dec 25, 2001)

Re the child's shirt, if I saw it I wouldn't be offended, nor would I think it justifies being thrown out the zoo.

But I would seriously wonder about the values of a parent who would think such a negative message that is going to offend the majority of people is amusing. And what message that gives to the child. I would also not like to have my own children deciphering the message and asking me what it meant.

There are far more witty and appropriate Tshirts out there, imo. (dd's favourite is one that says simply "It wasn't me."


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *QueeTheBean*
Despite an interesting debate, I do keep wondering if this is a joke.

I mean 7 is a LITTLE KID--really. I, myself swear like a sailor







: , but a 7 year old? 7???

The cultural part aside for a minute: I have an honest question--NOT meant to be flip-----but what, exactly, kind of "shit" does a 7 year old want to "fuck"? That is to say, what experiences has this 2nd grader had that make him want to "rage against the machine"??







:

My DS will be 6 in a few weeks & the angriest he gets is when his brother knocks down his lego tower. Trying to imagine him saying "fuck this shit"














(which I have, indeed, been reading as "shirt" until a few minutes ago)


Your post made me laugh out loud!!!!

ITA with you on this. To offer this as a method of communication to a 7 year old is dangerous.

How will this 7 year old express himself when he is 16 and his girlfriend dumps him or gets fired? Scary thought.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Lovebeads, it's all well and good to talk about how your brother may have been "sparing people" from seeing a swastika. But it reminds me of the families of World Trade Center victims that said "not in my name" to the war in Iraq. We have no way of knowing what the people there that day may have wanted. And IMO it's hubris to act on someones behalf and act like you're doing them a favor without even asking. I know that is how some of the WTC families felt.


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Quee that was hilarious about your son. Rage against the machine indeed, LOL.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Britishmum*

There are far more witty and appropriate Tshirts out there, imo. (dd's favourite is one that says simply "It wasn't me."









Fart jokes on a 5 year old?! Oh my!


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
Fart jokes on a 5 year old?! Oh my!










I actually never even thought about them refering to farting!


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*

ITA with you on this. To offer this as a method of communication to a 7 year old is dangerous.

How will this 7 year old express himself when he is 16 and his girlfriend dumps him or gets fired? Scary thought.

If a 7 year old tells his best friend that he loves him; clearly his love for his little friend will be pale and watery comapred to the love for his best friend at 16. But "love" still works because it is still a representation of what the person feels.

Well "f*uck this sh*it" works for a 7 year old who just realized he spent a hour trying to putting a puzzle together that is missing half its pieces; At 16 that dissmissal will feel pale and watery compared to "f*uck this sh*t" applied to the girl giving him the run around about whether or not she wants to go to prom with him. It isn't a slippery slope . . .


----------



## mgmsmommy (Jun 24, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
I actually never even thought about them refering to farting!









Me either, I was picturing a mess or something & my kids saying it to me


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mgmsmommy*
Me either, I was picturing a mess or something & my kids saying it to me

Around my house, that phrase is said exclusively by DH after he's eaten too much dairy







:


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

To the OP:

Go to this page and select your state from the drop down menu:

http://www.aclu.org/Affiliates/subsitesmain.cfm


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
I think the responsability is on the people that are offended by a shirt to not use it as an excuse for violence.

I agree. That's the way it should work. But it's not the way it works in the real world. That doesn't mean don't wear what you want to wear. Just be prepared for what you may have to face and act accordingly. For example, if you're walking into a frat party with a skirt that barely covers your rear and a shirt that's three sizes too small, be prepared to be sexually harrassed. Make sure you can handle yourself and that you'll have the presence of the mind to report the jerks.

Unfortunately, a 7-year-old isn't really capable of handling that level of interaction and, so, shouldn't be burdened with the responsibility.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
Lovebeads, it's all well and good to talk about how your brother may have been "sparing people" from seeing a swastika. But it reminds me of the families of World Trade Center victims that said "not in my name" to the war in Iraq. We have no way of knowing what the people there that day may have wanted. And IMO it's hubris to act on someones behalf and act like you're doing them a favor without even asking. I know that is how some of the WTC families felt.

Arduinna, I have to admit that I'm almost a little perversely excited because this is the very first time in my lurking/posting career at MDC that I have not agreed with you. I really have felt from the time I started here that you and I are very much on the same wavelength on basically every single topic.

But I really have to ask you this: do you really, really believe that someone who is at a concentration camp memorial wouldn't have a problem seeing someone wearing a swastika? I can't believe that most people wouldn't have a problem seeing it anywhere, let alone a place like that. And FWIW, my brother had a problem with it first and foremost - the other was an afterthought although I can't imagine it's that much of a stretch to think that he actually spared the majority of people who would have been offended by it. It would be as if someone wore a t-shirt to an AIDS rally that talked about how the virus is miracle drug. There are certain things that are just inappropriate, hurtful, mean and wrong. Even if they are technically "legal".

Declaring war on a country which did not attack us is not at all acting on someone's behalf, it is blaming the wrong party. I really don't see the comparison between the two.

Oh, by the way. He never did do anything violent to the guy, he left on his own.

I will make this my last post on the topic, not because I'm at all upset but because I don't think it's fair to the OP. It has been a fascinating thread, though!


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*
maybe you missed our lengthy and heated thread on clothing and rape?? Some people do believe that there is a relationship between clothes and rape, which is why I referenced our previous thread.

You know, this is exactly where I think the two scenarios diverge. In reality, there ISN'T a connection between clothing and rape. It's been proven - rape is primarily about power. It's only incidentally about sex.

If this child had been attacked, however, it would have been because the person was reacting to his shirt. (And no, that doesn't make the aggressor's actions excusable, but there is causation there, not just correlation).


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
For the non-swearers:

Bring on the love!

:LOL I'd love to join in, but I have a total potty mouth (at home, anyway). Ds, thankfully, uses "swear words" sparingly... and has been pretty good about not letting them fly in public.

I really don't mind if he curses... personally, I find expletives pretty satisfying sometimes. I do want him to know, though, that words *do* have tremendous power and that he should always consider a situation before sounding off.

If an adult was wearing this shirt, I would have hardly noticed it... I might have thought that person was immature, but that's just my personal bias shrieking out. The fact that it's a 7-year-old wearing it concerns me for the reasons I've said - it's too much for a little kid to shoulder.


----------



## anythingelse (Nov 26, 2001)

"If this child had been attacked, however, it would have been because the person was reacting to his shirt."
I disagree, I think people use visual triggers as an ***excuse*** for their own self gratifying behaviors.

look away, i say KWIM???
how much self control or maturity does it really take to turn those eyeballs


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
:LOL I'd love to join in, but I have a total potty mouth (at home, anyway). Ds, thankfully, uses "swear words" sparingly... and has been pretty good about not letting them fly in public.

I really don't mind if he curses... personally, I find expletives pretty satisfying sometimes. I do want him to know, though, that words *do* have tremendous power and that he should always consider a situation before sounding off.

If an adult was wearing this shirt, I would have hardly noticed it... I might have thought that person was immature, but that's just my personal bias shrieking out. The fact that it's a 7-year-old wearing it concerns me for the reasons I've said - it's too much for a little kid to shoulder.









dragonfly ITA


----------



## Pynki (Aug 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *China white*
\








: *ahem* mumble .....mumble......."Legends of the Fall" - Tristan to Alfred, after he sleeps with Suzanna.....







:







:

















T

I knew that.. I knew that!!!


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
I agree. For example, if you're walking into a frat party with a skirt that barely covers your rear and a shirt that's three sizes too small, be prepared to be sexually harrassed. Make sure you can handle yourself and that you'll have the presence of the mind to report the jerks.

Nope. A girl from a popular sorority, especially if she is with a friend, can walk into a frat party "with a skirt that barely covers your rear and a shirt that's three sizes too small" and not get harassed because she is in a position of some power. A girl from a lesser sorority (yes, they are ranked) or not from a sorority, especially if she is alone, will be more likely to be harassed at the same party no matter what she is wearing. Sexual harrassment is about power not sex; thus clouthes don't matter in the choice of victims, powerlessness does.


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

GEESH ! I think there is alot being read into my post(s). First of all, a couple people misread the original post and thought I said that the shirt said "F*CK this SHIRT !" No, it says "F*CK this SHIT !" (I put the asterisk this time because I know I will be accused of once again being 'obscene' ). Secondly, at least one reply stated that I was acting disrespectfully toward the "security guard." None of us were in the least disrespectful to him ! I asked him very calmly and nicely to show me a written statement of the policy against such shirts. When he told me there was no such written policy, and that it should be "obvious" that that would not be allowed, and then told me that if we didn't leave, we would be "forcibily removed," I gathered my kids up and we left without another word. There was never any disrespect exhibited to him. Was I angry ? SURE ! But did I or my kids exhibit that in any way to the security guard or anyone else ? ABSOLUTELY NOT ! Nor did I indicate that in my post ! So please don't read anything into my posts that isn't there. I teach my kids to hold their anger and if they have any "venting" to do, not to do it to anyone in authority. My kids, contrary to what some posters in here may think after reading of the incident in question, are never rude or aggressive to anyone in authority. Yes, they swear, and yes, I wholeheartedly support them in doing so, but I do not allow them to do so to people in authority. As for my having my son wear the shirt in order to make some sort of "statement" or cause controversy (as some in here may have suggested), that never entered my mind or the minds of my kids. I personally didn't even think about it one way or the other, and I am sure my son didn't either. It was simply a day at the zoo with my kids. Nothing more, nothing less. Did I learn a lesson ? Yes...that there are alot more people, both in public and in some cases in here, who are more uptight about such things than I thought. I sincerely regret if I offended anyone at the zoo, any culturally-sensitive people, or anyone in here. That was never my intention. My intention in posting in here was NOT to get validation for my allowing my kids to swear or to wear such a shirt, but rather to get opinions on whether the actions of the zoo "official" were correct. (BTW, I also don't intend any disrespect to the zoo's "security guard" by saying "rent-a-cop" ...it's an expression, people, that's all ! Chill out !)


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Shann - but it was that misreading, and the resulting OT posts about just about everything under the sun that makes this thread so enjoyable. We made quite a sport of it . . .









BTW, I love how oblivious you were to the fact that people would find swear words on a shirt offensive. It is a little charming.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Shann, for me I think what made me jump to the negative conclusions about the whole thing was the last line of your OP. However, I find it extremely offensive to hear a small child swear muchless have the childs parent aplaud it. Sorry, that's just how I feel.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Shann,
If you post again on this topic could you please comment on the concept that was discussed in the thread in regards to sending out energy or messages.

I was brought up several times that the world is a angry place and the more positive energy or messages that are sent out into the world can only help.

I suggested one that actually included swears for those that enjoy them.

I would like to know your stance on teaching and putting forth positive energy particuliarly inregards to children.

Thanks


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Thanks, mama !







I guess I am just a little naive.







But there are 2 areas in these posts that really bother me (and hurt a little): The idea that I or my kids might even vaguely have intended this shirt to be culturally offensive against Orientals ! Anyone who knows me or my family knows that we are the most NON-racist people imaginable. The second thing that hurts is that I have read 2 posts that indicate that the posters thought this was a "joke post." This was ABSOLUTELY NOT a joke, but a real incident and a sincere request for opinions on the actions of the zoo guard.

Mountain mom, I guess I didn't (and don't ) see it as putting out negative "energy" or vibes, or whatever, so I guess I can't comment on your post.


----------



## Britishmum (Dec 25, 2001)

"Fart jokes on a 5 year old?! Oh my!"

Aagh. She's not five, she's three, and she wears the shirt several times a week. And it has never, ever occurred to me (or anyone else in my family or acquaintance) that it could refer to farting!!

Maybe I just have an innocent mind, but "It wasn't me" refers to making a mess, doing something she shuoldn't, but totally, totally innocent.

Anyway, nobody says "it wasn't me" re farting in my house or in my circle of friends, so maybe if others think that way, I'd better 'lose' that shirt.

How sad.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

..


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Shann, may I just say I can't believe how calm you are able to remain, considering some of the posts on this thread?


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Shann, may I just say I can't believe how calm you are able to remain, considering some of the posts on this thread?









Yea, I'm thinking she's one laid back mama


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Hearts Light, I guess I don't know where my mind is on this now. I am still angry, yes. And if I do decide to do something, it might just be to make the point that rights were violated...not financially to gain anything. This happened just last Friday, so it is still fresh in my mind.

As for my remaining calm, that's my nature. But also, why be angry at people in here? They are just expressing their opinions. Maybe I was wrong for letting my son wear that shirt...I don't think I was, and probably never will...but everyone's else's opinion is just as valuable as my own, so why rant and rave at people in here?


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Britishmum*
so maybe if others think that way, I'd better 'lose' that shirt.

For what it's worth, it would never have occured to me to connect the phrase "it wasn't me" with bodily functions, if it hadn't been pointed out. I think the way you do: that it would refer to a broken vase or something.


----------



## Emzachsmama (Apr 30, 2004)

Shann,

While I may not agree with you, I also applaud you for your handling of this thread. I'm not saying that anyone said anything wrong ~ they were after all stating their opinions and as you said everyone has the right to their own opinion ~ but you have displayed a lot of class by responding as you did.







Not everyone would have responded like that.


----------



## Emzachsmama (Apr 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
For what it's worth, it would never have occured to me to connect the phrase "it wasn't me" with bodily functions, if it hadn't been pointed out. I think the way you do: that it would refer to a broken vase or something.

I wouldn't have either! I would have thought of the mess that kids make too!


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

No personal offense, but I am perplexed about the "rights" you feel were denied you. For what it's worth, I think it would have been more politic and diplomatic of the guard to have offered you your money back and/or the option of turning out the shirt instead of making the "forcible removal" comment, but I believe that since you entered into privately owned property, you agreed by virtue of your entering there, to abide by the property's rules and standards. Free speech doesn't mean that you can say whatever you want whenever you want with no consequences.

Again without making this into a personal attack, I strongly disagree with your decision to encourage or support your children in expressing obscenities. I'm not as much into the "negative energy" idea, per se, but that kind of language is harsh, deliberately offensive, deliberately shocking, and is (most) often a tool used by people with poor vocabularies. I don't know what your situation is, so I am not saying this does apply to you or your children; I'm stating what my experience has been. Why encourage it?


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

The problem Charles is that the "dress code" wasn't clearly displayed and the security guard admitted that thee was no written code against the shirt. It was just his personal opinion. How is one to abide by a dress code that is at the whim of whoever is working that day and not in clear view of those wishing to enter before they purchase tickets.

I have to laugh at the comment regarding curse words mostly being used by those with a "poor vocabulary".


----------



## Rainbow (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Thanks, mama !

 






I guess I am just a little naive.







But there are 2 areas in these posts that really bother me (and hurt a little): The idea that I or my kids might even vaguely have intended this shirt to be culturally offensive against Orientals ! Anyone who knows me or my family knows that we are the most NON-racist people imaginable.

Mama, I don't think it was intended to be culturally offensive, I think it was intended to be funny, but the humor came at the expense of spoofing another culture and therefore is culturally offensive. And just for the sake of learning.... *cringe* it's Asian. Rugs are oriental, people are Asian (or more specifically chinese, japanese, etc) All in love and learning, mama


----------



## Rainbow (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Arduinna*

I have to laugh at the comment regarding curse words mostly being used by those with a "poor vocabulary".

ITA. I actually see my use of them increasing as I experience personal growth and my understanding of enlightenment. I no longer feel the words have the power and negative energy that I used to feel. I now view them as words that can be toyed with to tweak the mood of the words I'm expressing. But that is just me


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Hearts light... in response to your earlier post...

I understand and respect the fact that you, and some other parents, don't feel that kids should swear. I, however, feel just the opposite. I was brought up that words are only as powerful as we allow them to be, and "swear words" are no exception. I was permitted and allowed to swear as I was growing up in the presence of my parents and brothers and sisters. We were also taught that some people would find it offensive. I am doing the same with my kids (the t-shirt incident notwithstanding). My kids have been exposed to swear words since day one of their lives and were never taught to censor their words at home, so it's entirely second nature to them now. I will continue to allow them to use whatever swear word they wish to use, and will continue to openly encourage them to use them as frequently and profusely as they see fit. But they will also learn (as they already have) the civilty that can go along with restraint in their use. While I respect your position, I will ALWAYS support my kids' use of such words.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Actually, the humor is based on the assumption that Asian proverbs are generally profound and insightful, and yet it turns out to be an American pop culture phrase. So it's actually a compliment, if you think about it. So I'm not really surprised that Shann's Asian friends are not offended by it. If there are any Asians on the thread who are offended by it, perhaps they can explain the reason to me. If there are any Asians on this thread who are not offended by it, please back me up!


----------



## Lucysmama (Apr 29, 2003)

:


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
I will continue to allow them to use whatever swear word they wish to use, and will continue to openly encourage them to use them as frequently and profusely as they see fit.

Okay....but why? I wonder why you would want to do that. To encourage a child frequently to do something like swearing is kind of redundant in my opinion. Are there not other things you would rather frequently encourage them to do?

Whatever on the swearing topic...some do...some do not and some are clearly offended by profanity. I can take it or leave it...I have yet to hear my dd swear but when she does I will not fall off my seat. It is a neutral topic to me as long as she learns there is a time and a place which is something you indicated you are doing.

I just do not get _why_ you would want to _frequently and profusely encourage_ your children to swear.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

i don't get it either.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

I personally wouldn't have cared less if I saw someone wearing this at the zoo. I see all sorts of stuff that I find obnoxious, insulting, crass, offensive, etc., but I certainly don't expect other people to filter themselves for my benefit. I don't walk around thinking that I have a right to not be offended, no matter where I am. But if I'm the owner of the zoo, I do have the right to ask someone to leave based on the scenario that was presented, even if there is no written policy.

However, I would not let my child wear a shirt with swear words on it. I have a potty mouth myself, and won't be uptight about my children using curse words in what I would consider the proper context. They don't get to call anyone names, but if they shout "f*ck" when they stub their toe, well, so be it. But I will certainly teach them that it's not something polite to do in public, and then they can make their own decisions as they get older. But actually encouraging them to swear? I don't see the point.

The legal geek in me would love to continue the debate about the whole free speech on private property argument, however. Mainly because I know I'm right (you always gotta love arguing when you're sure of yourself!), but also because I live for a good legal debate, and dh refuses to participate in them!


----------



## Lucysmama (Apr 29, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Actually, the humor is based on the assumption that Asian proverbs are generally profound and insightful, and yet it turns out to be an American pop culture phrase. So it's actually a compliment, if you think about it.

Uhhhhhhhh.........no.


----------



## Emzachsmama (Apr 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
I just do not get _why_ you would want to _frequently and profusely encourage_ your children to swear.

Shann didn't say that....what she said was that she would encourage them to use those words as frequently and profusely as _they_ saw fit.

I may not agree with her but there is a difference and I just wanted to point that out.


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

When I am somewhere trying to enjoy myself and have fun, hearing swear words is like sitting on a hillside looking at a beautiful, flower-filled meadow ... with a huge billboard erected right in the middle. It just spoils the ambience. As I have said before, I feel that swear words are used because they have power, and that power is not positive. I am not pristine; I have been known to utter an expletive or two when I am injured or pushed to the limit. They are an expression of extreme emotion. As such, I think they have no place in the public sphere "just because," as in the case of this shirt.

For those who feel that words have no power, would you also be ok with people casually using the words ******, ****, ******, ****, bitch, etc? Would you call your child a stupid brat? If words have no power, why does it even matter how we talk to (and about) one another? Verbal aggression is verbal aggression, whether it's directed at one person in particular or the world at large. I know that if I were talking to someone and they said that my opinion was "f*cking stupid," I would feel a lot different than if they said that my opinion was "not one I would agree with." So I don't buy the argument that words are just words.

Without meaning to sound smug or moralistic, I do hope that Shann will think twice about letting her son wear that shirt to a public function again, because now she knows that other people are upset by it.

Wilma


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Swearing and calling people names are two separate things.

Swearing is actually more than just explicatives when you stub your toe. It is not just verbal aggression, perhaps for you (thus you avoid it), but not for everyone.

Someone earlier thought that "f*ck this sh*t" could never be said with a smile since it was an angry, aggressive phrase, yet when I thought about it, I realized I always say it, unangry, with a half-smile since to me it is a funny dissmissive phrase used when burocracy overwhelms commonsense.

I do know that other people hear it diferently, and thus I do reserve my colorful language for my family and friends who I know don't think twice about it.


----------



## Pynki (Aug 19, 2002)

To go further







T

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
Nope. A girl from a popular sorority, especially if she is with a friend, can walk into a frat party "with a skirt that barely covers your rear and a shirt that's three sizes too small" and not get harassed because she is in a position of some power. A girl from a lesser sorority (yes, they are ranked) or not from a sorority, especially if she is alone, will be more likely to be harassed at the same party no matter what she is wearing. Sexual harrassment is about power not sex; thus clouthes don't matter in the choice of victims, powerlessness does.

I have to agree.. I played with frat boys.. My bro was a frat boy.. Yeah.. Most of them aren't worth the time it takes to say their name when they are actually therein college.. The whole attitude made say.. Yeah.. Whatever.. BUT I never got harrased at a frat party, and I was never in a sorority.. I didn't even go to college, and I was younger than most of them.. A whole lot of it in that case is the power you give them.. I didn't hold much power for me.. I could have one if I wanted, and I didn't want to.. SOOOO.. Give the frat boys a break.. They aren't all lecherous schmucks lying in wait to rape or assault a scantily clad girl in their house..


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

j


----------



## QueeTheBean (Aug 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Shann, may I just say I can't believe how calm you are able to remain, considering some of the posts on this thread?









ITA--I'd be hopping mad by now :LOL! But, I tend to be pretty emotional about everything!









I was one of the ones who thought this was a joke--I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings. I guess the whole concept of this shirt on a 7 year old is pretty "out there" to me & I have never heard of such a thing as actually _encouraging_ swearing in children. Maybe I am sheltered or something?? Anyway, I kept waiting for a big "April Fool" or a "gotcha". Sorry . . .


----------



## Foobar (Dec 15, 2002)

Shann,

I have read this entire thread (wow!) and here are my opinions and suggestions.

1) the security guard was too agressive. He was clearly on a power trip. I would speak to someone at the zoo and address the situation. He should have allowed you to turn the shirt inside out.

2) I believe the zoo was completely in their rights as a private property to not have to show you written rules of conduct. While it is clear to me that you do not see the offense in the T-shirt, many people do and it is something that I would be bothered by at a zoo. It falls under "decent public behavior".

3) I am not sure of the refund. I think it is fair to talk to someone at the zoo and discuss this calmly. I personally would think that if you had fought with the guard, then no, you didn't deserve a refund. However, since you were calm, I would think that you might be entitled to one. This is a gray area.

4) I think you missed a great opportunity to teach your son about public/private areas and free speach. It's sad to me that his response to this situation was "fuck their rules". No, they have rules for a reason and it would have been interesting to discuss these rules and try to look at them from other view points. Perhaps you can still do this. If you choose to disenpower words by allowing your children to swear freely, they still need to learn what is acceptable in society. They will one day be living in this society on their own and the generally acceptable issues need to be understood.

5) I do appreciate how calm you have been in your responses to this thread. I just wanted to point out that I also thought this might be a troll post just because you number of posts are low and you didn't respond to the first several pages. However, it is clear now that your question, rant and requests are real. Thanks for keeping a cool head!


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
Swearing and calling people names are two separate things.

Yes, they are, and given the choice, I guess I would rather my child swear than call people names (although I will teach them to do neither). But the point I was trying to make is that words *do* have power. They aren't "just words." If words were just words, then we wouldn't have certain words/names that we all pretty much acknowledge that it's *not* ok to say or call someone else.

Wilma


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

But *what* words have power varies with the situation, people, culture, etc...

I try to minimize the swearing, but I know that a very good friend of mine considers me to swear often. Why? Because I consider "pissed" and "sucks" to be part of the common vernacular and she considers them swearing. I do not say them with particular venom--- they are just words I use. For others, f*ck, c*nt, etc... may be the same. I have no idea what words will be considered acceptable when my children are adults, but there is a good chance that ones we find fringish now will be totally mainstream by then.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *oceanbaby*
The legal geek in me would love to continue the debate about the whole free speech on private property argument, however. Mainly because I know I'm right (you always gotta love arguing when you're sure of yourself!), but also because I live for a good legal debate, and dh refuses to participate in them!











The legal geek in me honors the legal geek in you, oceanbaby.









It's too bad that we're on the same side... we could just go off to our corner and debate between ourselves.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pynki*
To go further







T

I have to agree.. I played with frat boys.. My bro was a frat boy.. Yeah.. Most of them aren't worth the time it takes to say their name when they are actually therein college.. The whole attitude made say.. Yeah.. Whatever.. BUT I never got harrased at a frat party, and I was never in a sorority.. I didn't even go to college, and I was younger than most of them.. A whole lot of it in that case is the power you give them.. I didn't hold much power for me.. I could have one if I wanted, and I didn't want to.. SOOOO.. Give the frat boys a break.. They aren't all lecherous schmucks lying in wait to rape or assault a scantily clad girl in their house..

Sorry... apparently it was a bad example. I used them simply because it's a stereotype (with some basis in reality) that most people know of, not because I think all frat boys are lecherous schmucks.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
I think the MOST trouble she has ever gotten in was for saying an elderly man in an elivator with us was creepy.









T (sorry) but I have to ask why she got in trouble for that?

Couldn't it be that he *was* creepy... that maybe she was seeing something in him that you weren't? Granted, it's not nice to call people creepy to their face, but I think this is one of those situations where it would be less effective for the child to get in trouble than for the child to learn (through a calm chat) that there is an appropriate time and place to express that opinion.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

[


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TiredX2*
For others, f*ck, c*nt, etc... may be the same. I have no idea what words will be considered acceptable when my children are adults, but there is a good chance that ones we find fringish now will be totally mainstream by then.

Regardless of whether people today feel that f*ck, c*nt, b*tch, sh*t, etc., are perfectly acceptable to them, they have to (and by have to I mean certainly they know) realize that most people do not consider these words standard fare, *particularly* for children. I really have a hard time believing that the OP didn't know that people would be offended to see her very young son sporting a shirt with two profanities on it. In fact, I consider it rather disingenuous to dress a child in a shirt like that and then complain that you didn't know it would be a big deal.

In the end, to me, it comes down to common courtesy. There are plenty of things that I would like to do for my own personal reasons but don't because I take the feelings of others into consideration. I feel (and this is just my feeling) that it is immature to do things that you know will cause other people social discomfort just because you can. The paramount social lesson that I wish to teach my kids is that being respectful of other people is more important than frivolously gratifying their own whims. I hope that in most matters my children will think more of others than of themselves. But that's just me. I know that there are some people who wish to teach their children that freedom of self-expression is the paramount value. I grew up in an Amish community, and I absolutely believe that their emphasis on selflessness is the right cultural path to take.

Wilma

Edited to add that by "grew up in an Amish community" I meant that I was raised in an Amish family. I have, however, left the faith.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
NO NO NO~ Not like that. He was very old and trying to get his walker onto the elivator. She looked at the liver spots on his hands, turned up her nose and said "that guy is creepy!" I do not approve of or allow my chidren to express themselves at the cost of another persons feelings. I didnt say I smacked her!?, she got into trouble. I took erh er movie time away and talked with her about why is was wrong and how it made that man feel.

Ah, I see! (And for the record, I wasn't assuming you smacked her!)

I just read that as her getting into major trouble for making an observation (one that will be a good observation for her to make about some people someday) - not for the specific time and place she made it.

Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

,


----------



## rainsmom (Dec 5, 2001)

I think the OP should have gotten her money back.....and I would have waited until someone of authority got involved and gave it back.

On the other hand, I think they were perfectly in their right to tell the oP to leave. The shirt was unacceptable for public viewing in a family setting.

My 2 cents on letting children use profanity..........I view profanity used in front of or by children as a sign of a lack of respect, self respect, and for others. Children at that age dont know the meaning of FUCK......and until they understand what that word means, and all it entails, they shouldnt be using it.


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

I have to agree. I would've found it offensive to view in a public kids area. BUT...I do think she should've been fully refunded b/c it was the zoo's judgement call.

I really thought about this b/c dh has a t-shirt from the Exxon Valdez oil spill that shows F... You in the oil ripples, but you do have to fold the shirt to read it. And, he only wears it around here.


----------



## kate42 (Feb 2, 2003)

If the shirt was deemed offensive and violated the zoo's rules, the OP and her son should not have been allowed past the front entrance, IMO.

The person selling tickets and the security guard need to be on the same page.

I think the money should have been refunded since they were sold a ticket and allowed entrance into the zoo with no problem or comment on the shirt.


----------



## frand (May 8, 2004)

It's funny but I read this sitting next to a new picture of my daughter on my desk, taken on a day she totally dressed herself. The shirt she picked out says "L is for Love." When people see it, they go 'awwww' and get this smile on their face. I never would have realized, just looking at the shirt on a shelf, how the sweetness of the message would be amplified by the fact of a small child wearing it.

My boss says fuck this shit a lot, and the point of it is always to let people know that they are boring and/or pissing him off. Everyone hates it. It brings discussions to a halt and nothing constructive ever comes after.


----------



## BelovedBird (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Thanks, mama !







I guess I am just a little naive.







But there are 2 areas in these posts that really bother me (and hurt a little): The idea that I or my kids might even vaguely have intended this shirt to be culturally offensive against Orientals ! Anyone who knows me or my family knows that we are the most NON-racist people imaginable. The second thing that hurts is that I have read 2 posts that indicate that the posters thought this was a "joke post." This was ABSOLUTELY NOT a joke, but a real incident and a sincere request for opinions on the actions of the zoo guard.

Mountain mom, I guess I didn't (and don't ) see it as putting out negative "energy" or vibes, or whatever, so I guess I can't comment on your post.


*Orientals??*


----------



## MomInFlux (Oct 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kate42*
If the shirt was deemed offensive and violated the zoo's rules, the OP and her son should not have been allowed past the front entrance, IMO.

The person selling tickets and the security guard need to be on the same page.

I think the money should have been refunded since they were sold a ticket and allowed entrance into the zoo with no problem or comment on the shirt.

We don't know if this is the case, since the OP didn't specify, but it's entirely possible the boy was wearing a sweatshirt or jacket when he entered the zoo that was removed later, in which case the ticket seller would not have seen the tee-shirt. Also, sometimes a ticket seller may sell tickets to a parent without even seeing a child. If the people responsible for letting people into places such as a zoo had to screen everyone for offensive clothing, it would take forever to get into some places. I believe they must assume that folks entering are using common sense...


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Wow, this thread is getting so long. _And I haven't had to ask a single person to edit!!_ This *must* be an MDC record. Shann, you've now descended into MDC infamy, lol....Just wanted to add my voice of thanks (especially since wrapping knuckles falls under my job description) to how well you have handled yourself.

I'm also loving all the little tangents. The debates about Free Speech, the legal geeks bowing in respect to each other (you two crack me up!), the innocent and not-so-innocent interpretations of "It Wasn't Me" (I confess, the idea of farting didn't cross my mind), my-hearts story of her daughter and innocently hurting an old man's feelings (which actually made me think of Shann, who I honestly believe didn't know nor understands why the shirt may be culturally insensitive)...

It's these types of threads that make this place so cool.


----------



## Justice2 (Mar 18, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
No, I'm not talking about the way it would be ideally. I'm talking about the way it is in reality.

This is from the LLL site:

_"Mothers have a right to breastfeed where they go with their baby, even if that is out in public. It does not matter whether the mother goes to a public or a private place, or even whether they are in a state with legislation. No one has the right to tell a mother how to feed her baby, especially a way that increases the risk of illness to both mother and baby! Legislation has been enacted in nearly one-half of the states in the U.S. because they want to clarify this right, and in some cases, provide a remedy for mothers told to stop breastfeeding. It is hoped that legislation will help to change society's attitudes that breastfeeding is something indecent and should not be done in public. Underlying this, is the goal to increase the rates and duration of breastfeeding recognizing that this is an important health choice that must be encouraged.

&#8230;

"It is important to remember that women have a right to breastfeed in public whether there is a law or not. The purpose of legislation is NOT to legalize it, but to clarify the fact that women have the right to breastfeed in public, or that it is not a criminal offense, such as indecent exposure. Thus, if you are in a state that does not have legislation, you still have the right to feed your baby where you go."_

The First Amendment does not say "freedom to speak out against the government." It says "freedom of speech." If the framers had meant "freedom to speak out against the government," that's what they would have written. I'm certain they understood the difference and that they phrased the amendment deliberately.

On the issue of breastfeeding...you need to go here In Ohio, it is still illegal to breastfeed in public. Now, this is a "dumb law" website and I am actually looking up the law in Ohio Legislation now. My point is this...in our minds, and in the minds of LLL you SHOULD be able to feed your child where ever that child is hungry. Period. Your child does have a fundamental right to eat and a fundamental right to have the best food (i.e. breastmilk). However, there are still places that will throw you out for nursing your child there. Happens all of the time. Another example of this is, being a midwifery student, I (and several likeminded people, including Midwifery Today and Citizens for Midwifery) feel that you have a fundamental right to birth where ever you decide to, with whomever you want as an attendant. That's not the case, it's illegal (or alegal) in several states to deliver with a midwife at home.


----------



## Kundalini-Mama (Jul 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelovedBird*
*Orientals??*











Rugs are oriental, people are asian.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Justice2*
in our minds, and in the minds of LLL you SHOULD be able to feed your child where ever that child is hungry.

No, it's not just that in LLL's mind you *should* be able to. People have a legal right to breastfeed in public. The information I quoted is what you get when you click on "breastfeeding information " and then "breastfeeding and the law." It isn't "this is what we need to fight for," it's "these are the facts."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Justice2*
However, there are still places that will throw you out for nursing your child there. Happens all of the time.

Can you give me a recent example?

Occasionally you hear about some employee who is ignorant of the law, asking someone to go to the bathroom or cover up. There's almost always a big stink followed by an apology. Can you give me a recent example of anyone being arrested for breastfeeding?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Justice2*
Another example of this is, being a midwifery student, I (and several likeminded people, including Midwifery Today and Citizens for Midwifery) feel that you have a fundamental right to birth where ever you decide to, with whomever you want as an attendant. That's not the case, it's illegal (or alegal) in several states to deliver with a midwife at home.

That's not entirely accurate, either. It is legal to have a homebirth in every state. It's just that in some states, a midwife who attends a homebirth can be arrested for practicing medicine without a lisence. I live in such a state, and I had two midwife-attended homebirths, but I, as the mother, did not break any law. I am an activist in the cause, and when I talk about it, I say, "midwives *should* be allowed to attend homebirths," whereas when I talk about breastfeeding, I say "women have a legal right to breastfeed in public, anywhere in the country," because that is the truth.


----------



## Justice2 (Mar 18, 2003)

sbf said:


> That's not entirely accurate, either. It is legal to have a homebirth in every state. It's just that in some states, a midwife who attends a homebirth can be arrested for practicing medicine without a lisence. QUOTE]
> 
> You're right, I didn't word that correctly. It's perfectly legal to have an uc anywhere in this country. It's not perfectly legal in every state to have a DE, Lay, traditional, or CP midwife attend your birth. In those instances, the midwive (if caught) faces charges, not the parents. Again, I am sorry for the wording.
> 
> I am looking for examples of arrested breastfeeding mothers.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lucysmama*
Uhhhhhhhh.........no.









Why not? People keep implying that's it's bashing another culture, but I have yet to hear an explanation. I am eager to understand the argument.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

Because representing some set of squiggles as Chinese writing is inherently disrespectful. To use that format to disguise a scatological/ obscene phrase is more so. It's not much different than making a bunch of nonsense dypthong sounds and pulling your eyes out at the corners and pretending to be Chinese.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

ITA KAMA

Hopefully there won't be debate on that point. It is plan as day why that is offensive to asians.


----------



## frand (May 8, 2004)

YES -just let me agree because I tried to express an answer too and gave up because it sounded too academic. Thank you kama for saying it exactly RIGHT.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Justice2 said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sbf*
> ...


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kama'aina mama*
Because representing some set of squiggles as Chinese writing is inherently disrespectful. To use that format to disguise a scatological/ obscene phrase is more so. It's not much different than making a bunch of nonsense dypthong sounds and pulling your eyes out at the corners and pretending to be Chinese.

Really? You think it's like doing THAT??

It reminded me more of another t-shirt that I once saw that defined various religions on the basis of the phrase "sh*t happens." For Confucism (sp?), it said "Confucious say: sh*t happens." Again, the humor is based on the fact that Confusious usually says much more profound and insightful things.

Like the OP, I am one of the most anti-racism people in the world. But even I think it's a bit over-sensitive not to have a sense of humor about such shirts.

I wouldn't think it disrespectful for an Asian person to wear a shirt that says "American saying:" and then make a crude Asain phrase look like English letters.

I wouldn't characterize it (no pun intended) as using their writing style to hide an obscenity. I think it's meant as an instant-translation device, and the "translation" is meant to be ironic.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Well said Dragonfly!







I don't think in society today we can assume our rights to unwritten laws anymore. THAT is why our fed gov and state gov write those laws to protect us. It's also nice when they do so in a way that tells americans that breastmilk is a superior food for infants and that they should not and will not be denied that.
As for the message being offensive to Asian people, having been raised in a podunk town in central Texas, I get it. I don't even know an Asian IRL! I did once though...







:


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Really? You think it's like doing THAT??

It reminded me more of another t-shirt that I once saw that defined various religions on the basis of the phrase "sh*t happens." For Confucism (sp?), it said "Confucious say: sh*t happens." Again, the humor is based on the fact that Confusious usually says much more profound and insightful things.

Like the OP, I am one of the most anti-racism people in the world. But even I think it's a bit over-sensitive not to have a sense of humor about such shirts.

I wouldn't think it disrespectful for an Asian person to wear a shirt that says "American saying:" and then make a crude Asain phrase look like English letters.

I wouldn't characterize it (no pun intended) as using their writing style to hide an obscenity. I think it's meant as an instant-translation device, and the "translation" is meant to be ironic.


THe fact that you don't see the reasoning has nothing to do with it. It's of course not as offensive to the non-Asian population. Just crude. Try to see it from another angle.What if it was a shirt depecting something that is apart of your "culture" as a joke. How about feminism? Tandem nursing? You get the idea (for lack of better examples).


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
approximately 12,000 women are arrested each year for breastfeeding in public.

I find that a bit difficult to believe. 12,000/year IN THE U.S.?? What is the date on that article? How come I hear all about it if one woman in Arkansas is asked to cover up, but I don't hear a word of it when 12,000 women are actually ARRESTED?? WTF???


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

You asked a question. I have answered you as simply and clearly as I can. I am not going to be drawn into a debate about it.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
I don't think in society today we can assume our rights to unwritten laws anymore. THAT is why our fed gov and state gov write those laws to protect us.

The purpose of a legal system is not to give people rights. That would assume that the default is that people have NO rights. The purpose of a legal system is to place restrictions. When a law is passed saying "we welcome breastfeeding in our state," it is a show of good will -- it is not really necessary. The downside of such laws is that it makes people in other states fear that they might NOT have that right. There is no law anywhere giving me permission to breathe, and I don't need one. There has never been a law saying abortion is legal. It was legal by default until a law was passed making it ILLEGAL -- and that law was subsequently struck down as unconstitutional.

Some sexually-confused state legislatures have included flashing one's breasts as indecent exposure. Some of those states have subsequently passed amendments that basically say "by the way, breastfeeding doesn't count as indecent (DUH)."

Other countries do not have pro-breastfeeding laws, and they get along fine without them. In fact, they think we're pretty bizarre for having such laws, as if breastfeeding should even be an issue.

Personally, I'm offended by the idea that a government thinks I need its permission to breastfeed.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
What if it was a shirt depecting something that is apart of your "culture" as a joke. How about feminism? Tandem nursing?

How is it mocking their cultural practices, though? It's just making our writing look like their writing. I really am trying to see this from the point of view of a person whose culture's writing style is being imitated. I'm usually pretty good at imagining that I'm another person.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
I find that a bit difficult to believe. 12,000/year IN THE U.S.?? What is the date on that article? How come I hear all about it if one woman in Arkansas is asked to cover up, but I don't hear a word of it when 12,000 women are actually ARRESTED?? WTF???

That's what the New York Times says, apparently. I'm not sure of the date - the NYTimes article was quoted in another. I'm sure it could be found with a google search.

Btw - you hear about the cases that receive media attention because someone raises a stink about it. Not everyone has it in them (unfortunately) to raise such a stink.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
The purpose of a legal system is not to give people rights.

You're exactly right. But when a natural right has been taken away (the right to bare one's breasts in public, for example), then those who seek to exercise that natural right only have a *legal* right to do so if they a) have an exemption under the applicable law or b) have another law that specifically protects their behavior under certain circumstances.

And that is all the time I can contribute to this particular conversation. I have a feeling that you and I are going to remain like ships passing in the night on this one, sbf.


----------



## iamprego (Dec 3, 2001)

_*temporarily deleted by moderator pending response to edit request*_


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
. I'm usually pretty good at imagining that I'm another person.


Guess not this time... Plenty of people have tried to explain this. It's not beyond comprehension.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
How is it mocking their cultural practices, though? It's just making our writing look like their writing.

I think it is mocking asians because of the statement that is written. If it was a positive message, which it is not, then it would not come across as being offensive or racist. Now truly you can see that can you not?

If the message on the tshirt was to read...have a nice day....for example it would be a creative expression of positivity but "fuck this shit" implies that the shit we need to fuck is asian. This is an intrepretation shared by more people than just me.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
you hear about the cases that receive media attention because someone raises a stink about it. Not everyone has it in them (unfortunately) to raise such a stink.

But how come it's just the people who are asked to cover up or go to the bathroom that raise a stink and not the people who are actually *arrested*? It doesn't make any sense to me.


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:

representing some set of squiggles as Chinese writing is inherently disrespectful. To use that format to disguise a scatological/ obscene phrase is more so








Very true
I see it as saying their script isn't real or worthy.








T

Quote:

It's not perfectly legal in every state to have a DE, Lay, traditional, or CP midwife attend your birth








That is so incredibly backwards and ill conceived. grrrrrrrrrrr


----------



## iamprego (Dec 3, 2001)

the government does not grant rights. it grants privileges and licenses.
your rights are given to you by God.
the government is not your God.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
Guess not this time

Sorry, but are you Asian? If not, then what makes another non-Asian person's guess at what an Asian might think any more valid than mine? If you are, then I apologize for my presumtion.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
"fuck this shit" implies that the shit we need to fuck is asian.

Oh my goodness! You think it means THAT?? No wonder you think it's offensive! I really think people are reading meanings into this shirt that are NOT intended.

I think the shirt is asking us to imagine if there were an ancient Asian proverb that translated as "f*ck this sh*t," and that it's supposed to be funny because of course an ancient Asian proverb wouldn't translate as a modern American pop culture saying.

It's funny how two different people can read the same shirt and get two completely different ideas. Like the "It wasn't me" shirt.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
If the message on the tshirt was to read...have a nice day....for example it would be a creative expression of positivity

I think I actually might be irritated if the shirt said "have a nice day" if I were Asian, because that wouldn't even be funny.


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Good thing we got to this point, understanding what eachother intrepreted the message to mean.

It still rings racism to me due to the fact that the asian language is being used tonque in cheek and that is politically incorrect.

Perhaps some asians will think it funny, some will think its offensive and some won't care.

Your stance is clear on it and so is mine.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *iamprego*
the government does not grant rights. it grants privileges and licenses.
your rights are given to you by God.
the government is not your God.

guess I don't have any rights then.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

** guesses you're an atheist.

i found that statement to be a bit offensive also.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *klothos*
** guesses you're an atheist.

i found that statement to be a bit offensive also.









no, agnostic

Found her/his "nuts" post a bit harsh too.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

Welcome iamprego. I notice you don't post a lot and may not know this but personal attacks, such as "you're nuts" really aren't permitted here.

That said, her/his comment about rights not being granted by the gov are true... and in our founders wrote in some of the documants that serve as the basis for this countries government that they were "inalienable" and they are "granted by our Creator". Take that how you will in terms of it's religious implications but from a legal standpoint it does support the claim that rights need not be granted. Just the same in our increasingly complex world it is often the case that rights do need to be deliniated and clarified primarily for the purpose of keeping the government from standing on our necks.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Regarding how the shirt could be offensive to Asians, well, I'm part Asian, so maybe my reasoning has partial sense.

First, I personally would not be offended by the shirt itself, though I might find it inappropriate for a little kid to wear and would probably roll my eyes at it on an adult. Just my own personal preference there.

However, since the racial thing has been brought up, a white kid wearing something that incorporates words banned by the FAA and tries to make them "look like" asian writing could be construed as yet another example of white people making fun/degrading other cultures. The calligraphy is no longer actual calligraphy, but masquerading as something so that the offensive words don't pop into your face first thing. Asian cultures are pretty conservative in regards to how one presents oneself in public/speaks to other people (in general, though I guess most cultures everywhere are ideally like that), so the fact that the shirt is meant to be shocking might be considered yet another strike against it.

I think the shirt would be "funny" if it actually HAD the equivalent of "Fuck this Shit" in Chinese or Japanese calligraphy or Hangul, with no English translation or fake English/Calligraphy hybrid. Most YOUNG Asian folks that I know would find that hilarious, though their elders might not. But in this example, if one wants to be uber-PC, it's yet another co-opting by the Anglocentrists out there amongst us.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild*
I'm part Asian, so maybe my reasoning has partial sense.

:LOL

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild*
words banned by the FAA









:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild*
the fact that the shirt is meant to be shocking might be considered yet another strike against it.

Is it certain that it's meant to be?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Tigerchild*
I think the shirt would be "funny" if it actually HAD the equivalent of "Fuck this Shit" in Chinese or Japanese calligraphy or Hangul, with no English translation or fake English/Calligraphy hybrid.

The problem with that is that it would only be funny to people who could read those languages, which is a minority in this country. For most of the people in this country to get the joke, it has to be in English.

Thank you for sharing your perspective!


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

I suspect FAA=FCC refereing to the Federal Communications Commision and the infamous *7 Words* you can't say on television, as made famous by George Carlin.


----------



## Justice2 (Mar 18, 2003)

T (but then again, isn't most of this thread!)

I am sorry to go way, way off in left field, but this is a law suit I ran across in my search for breastfeeding arrests...I am loving this and am trying to come across a date and action taken..thought most (if not all) of you would be interested.

Lawsuit


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Sorry, but are you Asian? If not, then what makes another non-Asian person's guess at what an Asian might think any more valid than mine? If you are, then I apologize for my presumtion.

.


No, I am not Asian. I don't think you would have to be to "get it". I didn't say that my opinion was more valid than yours (I just thought it). What I"m saying it that it does not matter if you can see why it would be, it's not going to be to everyone who is Asian. It's a matter of your arguing that there is nothing to be offended about when clearly you cannot decide that for everyone.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
The problem with that is that it would only be funny to people who could read those languages, which is a minority in this country. For most of the people in this country to get the joke, it has to be in English.

No, no, that's the whole point. Why is that phrase only funny when it's co-opting another culture's writing style (one that is highly prized, even!) AND says something that is almost part and parcel offensive to most of the Asian cultures that people in this country think of. I know China's culture(s) are changing rapidly, so perhaps "Fuck this Shit" would be considered a funny, devil-may-care attitude...but it wouldn't in Japan. Or Vietnam. Or Korea. Or the Phillippines. Since the shirt masquerades/mocks a calligraphy style, then I'm assuming it's meant to pretend to be Chinese or Japanese writing.

If you think "Fuck this Shit" is funny, why not get him a shirt with straight out English? Or one that masquerades as Russian writing, since there probably IS a Russian proverb that's similar or even more colorful (I actually think that most Russian folks I know WOULD find that funny...as long as they weren't grandmothers/grandfathers) though I suppose in theory you'd run into the same problems.

Or, do a real calligraphy shirt, and have the translation in parenthesis. Then it would be poking fun at the fad of people using meaningless calligraphy because it "looks cool".

Would you think a similar shirt that masqueraded as Arabic script was just as funny? With the statement, "Ancient Wisdom of the Prophet?"

And really and truly. Do you HONESTLY mean to tell me that you do not think that shirt was MEANT to be offensive? Come on. You might not think it is, and I've certainly seen worse. But come on. You know our culture just as well as I do. If you don't agree with this aspect of our culture, then great! Fight it! But let's not feign innocence here.


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Regarding cursing - people are taking offense on it being called ignorant. You can choose to use it and view it however you want but you have to realize that there are many people (myself included) who will hear you use it and think you are ignorant, uneducated and trashy. Personally if I am out in public and I hear someone so "Oh fuck this shit" I would immediately think 1) they are trashy, 2) they are uneducated and 3) they are low class because they cannot express themselves intelligently. I don't care if intelligent people use curse words. That does NOT make the curse words themselves intelligent. I have a very high IQ but if walked around saying, "you are a poo poo head" the words would not become intelligent just because I said them. So people saying well I'm a lawyer or my dad is an English professor so cursing is not ignorant just does not make sense. I honestly cannot believe there are so many people who think that being out in public and say, getting cut off while driving and leaning out the window and yelling "fuck you asshole!" sounds intelligent or not ignorant. There are other ways to express yourself without using those words. And to let little children curse like that? That is disgusting IMHO. You are setting your child up to look trashy in public. Why would you want to do that? You can believe anything you want to believe but we do still have to live in this society. Advocating breastfeeding rights is one thing - the child HAS to eat and it benefits both mother and child. Who is benefitted by cursing? Not the person who says them or the person who has to listen to that garbage. If I was in public and someone spoke like that in front of my children I would say something. Wait, actually I have. We were at the park which is also a campgrounds and a guy walked by carrying a big bundle. One of the women sitting there yells out "what are you doing?" The guy said "I'm going to do laundry" and she yells "where the fuck are you going to do that?" I turned to her and said "excuse me my children are here and they don't need to hear that kind of language." As I walked away I heard her say to her friend "I can say what I want to say," so I turned back around and said, "If you choose to display yourself in public as ignorant that is your business but when your ignorance teaches my children negative and vulgar language then it becomes my business." She said "whatever" and walked away.

Regarding the OP - they had every right to kick her out and I don't think they need to issue a refund. If I had been at the zoo and seen that shirt I would have complained to the management. And it sickens me that someone who think it was funny 1) for their child to wear that shirt and 2) that it was funny for their child to say "Fuck their rules." There are just so many things wrong with that IMO I won't even attempt to explain it all.


----------



## nikirj (Oct 1, 2002)

My husband is part-Chinese (and lived with his Chinese-from-China grandmother for most of his childhood).

He says this shirt is offensive because:

1) It pokes fun at Chinese proverbs. It's like putting "Jesus said - Screw you Bastards" on a tshirt. Just not right.

2) Chinese calligraphy is an art form. They study and take very seriously the ability to write gracefully and accurately. Not only that, but in China there is a large variety of spoken language, but just one main written system, so that even people who cannot communicate via spoken language can communicate through the written system. The writing system is important to them. Seriously though, he says that this is far less offensive than reason #1. To him not offensive at all, maybe it would be to his grandmother though, but he suspects she'd just think it was slightly distasteful.


----------



## scorpioqueen (Apr 11, 2004)




----------



## scorpioqueen (Apr 11, 2004)

Opps my happy nodding head was sosposed to be on a diffrent thread not sure what happened!

I'd comment on this thread but I'd get a serious case of







disease.

Deanna


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

Thank you for your post Heavenly , well said in my opinion.

Thank you for your perspective too Nikirj, again well spoken.

Its one thing to swear as an adult, perhaps after you have mastered a decent vocabulary and are doing it because you understand the words and it 'feel good' to you, but really...a seven year old child is not benefitting from learning these words at this time. This is a time to really teach children many interesting words, swears will obviously come but why bring in this so early on? I just do not think a child has the ability or intelligience to handle the responsiblity of swearing in public. Many things could happen as a result of their speaking out in profanity. Is a seven year old capable of handling the outcome...I doubt it.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I am genetically not Asian at all (so far as you can tell by looking at me; I'm adopted) but I was raised by a half-Asian mother who was born and spent most of her early life in Hong Kong. My whole maternal family speaks Cantonese, and Asian culture has been a heavy influence in my upbringing (especially the food part, lol).

I was struggling to express why that shirt is offensive, but now so many people have so eloquently stated it that I only need refer to Tigerchild and nikirj's posts.

I think the Jesus analogy is bang on: imagine a picture of Jesus on the cross with a big "You'll be F*cked when my Dad hears about this!" written on the sign above his head. Now personally, I might actually laugh at such a picture, because I am not christian and this particular guy has no deep meaning for me. however, i don't need to be christian to recognize that this would be offensive and hurtful to christians, and I would never wear or say something like that in public.

If it's so funny to say "F*ck this Shit" then why hide it in Chinese. And why Chinese? A culture that is so definitely NOT about using vulgarity.

I will disagree with Tigerchild on one point though, I honestly believe that the OP, and others who don't "get it"....really DON'T get it.

Have you guys ever watched those really old cartoons? Where the "Japs" are depicted as distorted caricatures, etc? Well, back in the day, you'd be hard pressed to find alot of whites who would understand why, today, such a cartoon would be totally unacceptable.

But I feel like it shouldn't matter if you don't "get" why it's offensive. If several people tell you it is, you shouldn't have to push the issue. If you realize it hurts people and affects the way they are treated in society, from that point on you should be aware and show care.

There are times when offending people can be good, if it forwards basic human rights, or promotes a good (ie. public breastfeeding).But regardless of your opinions about swearing in children, you cannot argue that any "good" was accomplished by such a shirt.

_PS - edits have been requested. thus ends the "edit request-free" portion of this discussion._


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

But hey, We did pretty good for 16 pages huh?


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Justice2*







T (but then again, isn't most of this thread!)

I am sorry to go way, way off in left field, but this is a law suit I ran across in my search for breastfeeding arrests...I am loving this and am trying to come across a date and action taken..thought most (if not all) of you would be interested.

Lawsuit

I LOVE that lawsuit! Thank you for posting it.

In my state (New York) it is perfectly legal for a woman to walk around topless.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly*
I honestly cannot believe there are so many people who think that being out in public and say, getting cut off while driving and leaning out the window and yelling "fuck you asshole!" sounds intelligent or not ignorant.

I honestely cannot believe think are so many people who think swearing = calling people names. There have been so very many posts that said that they don't care if their kids curse, but they don't allow their kids to call anyone names (including non-bad words names, like stupid). I don't quite get why this is a hard concept to accept?

BTW, if I am talking to someone and realize that they are uptight about swearwords, I'd think them a little unenlightened and lowbrow. I really would.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
Thank you for your post Heavenly , well said in my opinion.

Thank you for your perspective too Nikirj, again well spoken.

Its one thing to swear as an adult, perhaps after you have mastered a decent vocabulary and are doing it because you understand the words and it 'feel good' to you, but really...a seven year old child is not benefitting from learning these words at this time. This is a time to really teach children many interesting words, swears will obviously come but why bring in this so early on? I just do not think a child has the ability or intelligience to handle the responsiblity of swearing in public. Many things could happen as a result of their speaking out in profanity. Is a seven year old capable of handling the outcome...I doubt it.

Gosh I don't remember my parents TEACHING me curse words any more than they taught me most words, I learned by hearing. They did however teach us kids what language was appropriate where/when. I NEVER swore in public and actually still don't. Kids can fully understand (young young kids) what language is appropriate when. We don't give kids enough credit I think.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast...eut/index.html

Post about a man crossing out bad words from library books

Guess the books were being ignorant and lowclass and trashy . . .


----------



## mountain mom (Nov 6, 2003)

I remember my parents teaching me words. We had word of the day themes starting around the time I hit grade three all the way up to moving out. The way that it worked was my Mom or Dad would state the word at breakfast and then throughout our days we had to come up with a definition, a way to use it and perhaps a creative project about it. We then would discuss said word and our experiences with it at the dinner table. It often sparked alot of great, constructive conversation.

Eventually, my sister and I participated in selecting the word.

I do not think anyone is proposing that in literature, profanity does not have a place. I think that example is misdirected to the op.

I am stating that parents teach their children words because many lessons are taught by example.

I swear...but I do not swear around my dd, yet. She is too young to understand the responsibility of using such language.

This is my and my dh's preference. Perhaps you have a difference preference.


----------



## CortLong (Jun 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dynamicdoula*
7yo wearing a shirt in a zoo w/the F word on it? Yeah.. to me at least, a little offensive, and I'm no prude!







I would definitely be upset if I saw that at the zoo. When my husband was 16 he was told to either leave the mall or turn his t-shirt inside out that said "If you dont like what we do" on the front, and "Fuck off" on the back. I would be less offended to see a 16yo w/the shirt than a 7yo! lol It is a little funny tho too, but just not at a zoo where the place is primarily for children, ykwim? Maybe at Monster Jam!









As far as refunding your $... I am not sure. If you guys had been yelling profanities and they'd kicked you out, would you have expected a refund? I think they could have given him the option to turn the shirt inside out or leave, but I don't know that a refund is appropriate.

I agree with this poster.


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
BTW, if I am talking to someone and realize that they are uptight about swearwords, I'd think them a little unenlightened and lowbrow. I really would.

Oh, yes, because it's usually those lowbrow, unenlightened opera and symphony fans who are chugging beers and displaying "Show us your tits!" signs at their recreational functions, as opposed to those sedate NASCAR and pro wresting afficionados.









I am glad I followed this thread; it has made me more determined than ever to excise those occasional swear words from my repertoire.

Wilma


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

ju


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*

I do not think anyone is proposing that in literature, profanity does not have a place.

Some of those writers of literature were prosecuted/censored/shunned (i.e. thought ignorant and non-literary) for using such language.

Use of langauge in literature and use of language in my daily life don't seem that different to me (course, I'm a English doctoral student). I use langauge to its very fullest and most apt, and I will model such for my kids who I do believe can understand the awesome responsibilty that is langauge/communciation. My parents trusted us to understand, modeled and instructed us about the power of language, and we got it at a very early age. Kids are smart little cookies

We have no euphenisms for sh*t at my house since sh*t is sh*t. But using langauge hatefully is another thing entirely - therein lies a much harder lesson to teach than don't use certain words in public (which I remember understanding at least by 4). Swearing and hateful language are two separate things; though swearing can be hateful, so can non-swear words. Swearing is not necessarily hateful, nor is it simply explitives (in fact, never the first and rarely the second at my house).


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BunnysMomma*
Oh, yes, because it's usually those lowbrow, unenlightened opera and symphony fans who are chugging beers and displaying "Show us your tits!" signs at their recreational functions, as opposed to those sedate NASCAR and pro wresting afficionados.









I am glad I followed this thread; it has made me more determined than ever to excise those occasional swear words from my repertoire.

Wilma









Oh, I mean lowbrow in a trying-too-hard-to-be-middle-class way. Paul Fussel's Class (funny funny book about America's class system) claims that middle-class uptightness about things like swearing is all class anxiety about slipping into the lower-class.

Ha ha. Cause this thread makes me want to start adding swear words to my repertoire


----------



## AahRee (Jan 23, 2003)

Right. Being *uptight* as you put it about swear words is just about a fear of slipping into the lower class (whatever that means), and not about respect, politeness, courtesy, and the like.

I'm with those who have said that using those words belies a lack of intelligence or vocabulary. It's easy to throw out an *f-bomb* at anything that frustrates you, or really, anytime you're feeling too lazy to find a more appropriate word. I realize that some people who frequently use those words do know plenty of other words. IMO, that makes the use of the *f-bomb* that much worse.

So, those of you who think that using profanity is okay probably agree with the Colorado university president who said that the C*NT word can be considered a *term of endearment*, then?


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AahRee*

So, those of you who think that using profanity is okay probably agree with the Colorado university president who said that the C*NT word can be considered a *term of endearment*, then?

So I'm just going to cut and paste and following paragraph since it looks like I going to be repeating it again and again and again . . .

Swearing and calling people names/hateful langauge are two separate things;
Hateful langauge includes calling people words like c*unt, but it also includes calling people stupid. "There have been so very many posts that said that they don't care if their kids curse, but they don't allow their kids to call anyone names (including non-bad words names, like stupid)." (I quote myself







)

I was half joking about the class stuff. Some people here said that they deem those who curse "ignorant" "low class" and "trashy" (thier words). Well Fussel, a well-known historian, has a theory about people who are hung-up about "proprities" (i.e. anxiety about thier precarious class status).

I do tend to think that being uptight about swear words (not, BTW, on a message board when cursing is being addressed abstractly and so people are posting thier opinions in more stridently/passionately than they would if swearing wasn't the topic du jour) smacks of small-time suberia (Plaza Village circa 1985 for anyone in Lafeytte La). BUT, the Fussel citation is mostly just a dig







to those who are calling swearing a sign of low class status (whatever that means - agree with you there







)


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

.


----------



## mamawanabe (Nov 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *my~hearts~light*
There is a difference between cursing and name calling. I think that some of us just view public profanity as ingnorant and disrespectful. Ignorant in the sense that they don't know any better and disrespectful in that they weren't raised any better than to disregaurd the feelings and rights of the people around them and let whatever they wish fly out of thier mouth. What you wish to say in the privacy of your home is one thing, exposing others to profanity is another.

Well then all is good, cause I don't curse in public and never have though I've said "what the s*hit is that" at home since I could talk. I think every mama, but the very laid back and a little naive OP, made the distinction between not minding if their children curse and and not minding if their children curse in public.


----------



## Changed (Mar 14, 2004)

.


----------



## melixxa (May 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamawanabe*
I think crusing can be wonderfully expressive. Read modern poetry. Read James Joyce. (both full of "such language") Swear words can do real communicative work.

I see nothing wrong with the OP letting her son wear a f*ck this s*it t-shirt. However, the appropriate/inappropriate times for different kinds of language use is an important lesson. If you dress and talk differently than other people are dressing and talking for a certain occasion, you will be shunned. Non-conformity is not free, there is a price you pay for not conforming. This time it was being kicked out of the zoo. And everyone has to decide what is worth it .

I agree completely. What a great opportunity to examine community values, weigh personal values and think about the issue of rights - for Shann and her son.

For us, too. This is an issue that has also been on my mind these past 18 months as people have begun saying to me (re: so-called profanity), "Oh, we'll/you'll/I'll have to stop that now!" meaning because we and other friends now have kids. I personally have decided to cuss less, not because I think it's offensive and agressive but because, in embracing and celebrating the richness and beauty and power of language (something I intend to share with my son and immerse him in), I don't want cursing to be weighted more than poetry and truly articulate argument.

Yes, cursing and "profanity" and "offensive" language (I use the quotation marks because I am not offended by these types of words, though I might be shocked, moved or angered, depending on the context ... not necessarily a bad thing) can be precision tools in the hands of the masters. They can express deep feeling, raw wounds, disenfranchisement. They can be more eloquent than any four-syllable word with a Latin root. I want my baby to learn and appreciate that someday, when he reads Eldridge Cleaver and J. Joyce and even (ugh, if he has to) Henry ****** and Philip Larkin. But even more importantly, the way to get to this appreciation (and the reason I will deliberately try to curse less), will be by using beautiful, expressive, articulate, complex, pictorial, imagination-fueling, intelligent, respectful language with my son to teach him that this is what I value and show him what the possibilities of language are.

FTR, I would describe the OP's son's shirt as irreverent, not as offensive or vulgar. I wouldn't wear the shirt but I certainly wouldn't want to tell anyone else not to. Yes, I understand that the shirt might be considered apalling by the majority. My mother would certainly tsk-tsk if she were to see it - and that's why I don't say "fuck this shit" or "fuck" or even the tame "shit" around her.

In response to a question posed by another poster in this thread, no, I am not in agreement that "fuck this shit" is per se and in and of itself "agressive." To me, truly offensive use of language involves directing racial epithets and the like at people, to attacking them with language. The shirt sounds like it is more along the lines of a joke, not necessarily a bad-natured one made at the expense of other peoples/another culture. The shirt may be considered "culturally insensitive" by some people, but that is still a far cry from racist.


----------



## frand (May 8, 2004)

Melixxa -- you might want to look at some of the earlier posts which made the great point that this is not just about the 'rights' of Shann and her son but their responsibilites too. They were at a place where they knew there would be other children and families (take the family memberships out of zoos and there are no zoos).

Also people haven't said the shirt is racist -- they believe the shirt was culturally offensive. At any rate, I don't think anyone can debate the fact that the phrase Fuck this shit is angry, profane and hostile. Yes these words are in Joyce and other great writers but these are NOT CHILDREN'S BOOKS! I would like to meet the 7 year old who reads Ulysses!


----------



## WithHannahsHeart (Apr 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mountain mom*
Okay there is a few things in this post that hit a nerve with me. I have read over the entire thread and posts by Kama, Indie and Oceanbaby resonated with the way I feel too.

But I just have to try and understand....What part of this t-shirt is adorable? It is a clearly racist t-shirt. Do you not see that? Chinese proverb....fuck this shirt?

I would be offended greatly if a saw a [/I]seven_ year old wearing this shirt. I am glad that the zoo kicked him out and to compare the right to wear this tshirt in public to the right to breastfeed in public (which is a law) is plan idiocy.

And you claim your son's right are violated...what about the rights of all the other families to not see such garbage!

Flame me if you will. I think profanity is a sign of ignorance.
_
_
_
_
Yes, all that. I suppose they could have offered you the possibility of turning the shirt inside out. Otherwise, grow the fuck up and deal







. VERY few people have your notions of what is acceptable in a family setting, and for you to disrespect most of the population of the zoo at large because of your 'rights', well... I should shut up now







:.

Oh, and i am disgusted at the comparison to being allowed to breastfeed. Give me a break







. Apples and watermelons in comparison._


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

The ONLY comparison I made between wearing a profane shirt and breastfeeding is that there are people who are offended by both. Can anyone really dispute that?

I'm concerned about the precedent it sets when a place of public accomodation is allowed to ban something based on the fact that it offends people.

Incidentally, I'm not saying that I would wear the shirt myself, it just seems like some people are over-reacting to it a bit.

Also, I wish there were more concern about censorship.


----------



## melixxa (May 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *frand*
Melixxa -- you might want to look at some of the earlier posts which made the great point that this is not just about the 'rights' of Shann and her son but their responsibilites too. They were at a place where they knew there would be other children and families (take the family memberships out of zoos and there are no zoos).

Also people haven't said the shirt is racist -- they believe the shirt was culturally offensive. At any rate, I don't think anyone can debate the fact that the phrase Fuck this shit is angry, profane and hostile. Yes these words are in Joyce and other great writers but these are NOT CHILDREN'S BOOKS! I would like to meet the 7 year old who reads Ulysses!

I read the entire thread before commenting.You might want to look at some earlier posts that discussed (among other things) the issues of federal law vs. private right; the values of the community vs. free speech rights; rights vs. responsibilities; and essentially all individual posters' attitudes towards not only this specific shirt in this specific context but also swearing and cursing and profanity in general. People have also spent a lot of time trying to agree on a separation of "swearing" and "name-calling." As this thread has broadened in scope in the last 17 pages, I felt free to comment on the related topic that interests me most: the issue of how to treat swear words and "profane" language vis-a-vis my son. (I also commented directly on the shirt being worn at the zoo by seconding Mamwanabe's statement that "I see nothing wrong with the OP letting her son wear a f*ck this s*it t-shirt. However, the appropriate/inappropriate times for different kinds of language use is an important lesson. If you dress and talk differently than other people are dressing and talking for a certain occasion, you will be shunned.")

FTR, the shirt was indeed deemed racist by some posting in this thread - just look at the comments by Cheminogo (?) quoted just above. She was one of several who used the term. Now, I'm not arguing that the shirt might not be found offensive by some Asians and/or others. Just saying that racist is a far cry from culturally insensitive, to use a PC term I hate but which comes in handy here to describe gradation (as "racist" is simply too strong - and not an apt tag for our OP).

Well, I guess I did not get my thoughts about language, embracing the power and beauty of language, and the use of "profanity" in literature across clearly. I certainly did not mean to say that "Ulysses" and others are children's books. But rather that, in the course of giving my son the linguistic and intellectual tools to one day appreciate *all* registers of the English language - from the "profane" to the lofty and the "vulgar" to the lyrical - I will not consider "swear words" to be off-limits, to be wrong and bad. No, this will probably not mean allowing him to dress in t-shirts bearing words that offend 95% of the population - though it might. That will be between me and him.

Anyway, since most responders to the OP do take offense at this kind of language and specifically at this shirt in this context, I thought it would be a good idea to stand up and be counted - as one individual who does NOT take offense.

Before I close (geez, I'm sooooo wordy), I wanted to add - because this was never touched on again - that Germany does indeed have strict laws barring certain racist expression, particularly of a Nazi-influenced bent. As part of the country's Basic Law, many things related to Nazi Germany are prohibited: artifacts sold on eBay, the selling of "Mein Kampf," the dissemination of Nazi/Neonazi literature, Holocaust denial. Holocaust denial is a crime there. It is no coincidence that the bulk of the Neonazi/white supremicist groups are based in North America. The man in the t-shirt at Dachau would have been arrested if the authorities had been called. Although I'm not a violent person myself, I do have to say I understand the urge to do him violence for wearing this t-shirt in this place. That was truly unconscionable.


----------



## Kinipela79 (Apr 8, 2003)

I haven't read the ENTIRE thread but wanted to comment quickly and perhaps it's already been said...and I'll use this quote below just to put me on track of what I am trying to say!

Quote:

Well, I guess I did not get my thoughts about language, embracing the power and beauty of language, and the use of "profanity" in literature across clearly.
Fuck this shit is not a beautiful expression of some authors deep and artful mind. Having swear words on a tshirt should NOT be compared to using swear words to make some point of poetry or script. I am sure this has already been said but I'm slooooooow. Ha!


----------



## Mrs. Edwards (Nov 14, 2003)

I think the OP has the right to wear or let her children wear whatever they choose. However, just as some people may think the zoo was invading on this family's parenting choices, some people at the zoo might have thought the OP was invading on their parenting choices (to refrain from seeing slang terms on clothing in a public family place).

However, the zoo has the right to refuse anyone service. And, most establishments will say this as well. But, I feel that the zoo could have first offered an alternative such as 'turn the shirt inside out, if not please leave'. I've not read all through these pages, but I myself would have been offended and would have requested the zoo officials to do something about it.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

You can control what you allow in your own home, but once you take your child out in public, you're taking your chances. I can see getting upset if a family friendly place puts up their own sign that has something offensive on it, but you can't control other individual people.


----------



## jeca (Sep 21, 2002)

WHEW!!!!!

okay, I think that the rent a cop was probably bluffing about forcably removing you but the police absolutly can, spoken from a person that has been forcable removed from places before







:

and you should have been offered the right to turn it out even if you were refused and you should have gottena refund. As fas as why they didn't say anything before well, maybe the right people didn't see it.

I have a question that I hope I won't be beat up too badly for but I'm dyeing to know!For those who don't have a problem with their kids saying bad words, one do you say anything to them about teaching it to their kids. My dauhter learned the word bitch from a 2 year old who's mother ddidn't have a /" hang up" about profanity. Her only reply was she;'ll leatn it soon enough of course I couldn't get her to stop saying it for mONThs. so, do you teach them that's not right or is it okay to use anytime they want.

second. I heard a a child maybe 8 or 9 tell his mother to shut the fu#@ up you stupid bit#$,Of course I stood the mouth wide open and she only replied that they teach it's okay to express yourself when your upset, I mean, er, is this really okay? Do you allow stuff like that. I mean would that be okay. I am not a prude either but these are shockers to me and I'm just wondering where the lines are?


----------



## MyBabiesCome1st (Jul 14, 2003)

I have read this thread since it was first posted and I have thought about this situation. I don't mind *cussing*. I do allow my kids to say words that others might not. There are rules that I teach along with being allowed to use that sort of language and so forth.

I do have a question though. From working in law enforcement I know that where I live you cannot use profanity in public. One situation I know of is if 2 people are having an arguement in public and 1 of the persons uses profanity that person can be arrested for disorderly conduct. Also if I am with my family at a public place, such as the park, and we are going about using profanity we can be arrested...disorderly conduct. So...according to what I've read...park = public place, funded by my tax $$...are my rights being violated?

I apologize to the OP for going a little OT, but this discussion has sparked that question for me.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyBabiesCome1st*
Also if I am with my family at a public place, such as the park, and we are going about using profanity we can be arrested...disorderly conduct. So...according to what I've read...park = public place, funded by my tax $$...are my rights being violated?

Absolutely... your right to free speech, as protected by the First Amendment. How on earth can incorporating crude words in your speech be construed as disorderly conduct??


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyBabiesCome1st*
I do have a question though. From working in law enforcement I know that where I live you cannot use profanity in public. One situation I know of is if 2 people are having an arguement in public and 1 of the persons uses profanity that person can be arrested for disorderly conduct. Also if I am with my family at a public place, such as the park, and we are going about using profanity we can be arrested...disorderly conduct. So...according to what I've read...park = public place, funded by my tax $$...are my rights being violated?

It's hard to say. Obviously there's a local ordinance against public use of profanity. That's kind of weird and seems like something you could at least get into court with if you wanted to challenge it on First Amendment grounds (if you were charged, anyway). Whether you'd win or not is kind of a crap shoot - my guess is not, but I'm not a judge. As various people in this thread (including me) have said, not all speech is protected... it could be that the courts would decide that you're "right" to use profanity in a public setting is negligible when compared to the locality's right to foster a "family-friendly" setting in areas of public usage. Locales can regulate certain types of expressive speech (that's another question - would that even be considered expressive speech) so long as it's a "time, place, or manner" restriction. In other words, not a blanket restriction, but only under certain circumstances. There also has to be a determination that your ability to express yourself on a subject has been substantially affected. I think that one would be a hard threshold to reach.


----------



## MyBabiesCome1st (Jul 14, 2003)

I really do not want to test the laws, but how do you interpret this law? http://members.aol.com/StatutesP7/18PA5503.html

Quote:

§ 5503. Disorderly conduct.
(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:

engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
makes unreasonable noise;
uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

....
The way I am understanding this is they can validate "use obscene language" is b/c it can be offensive...but do we really have the right to be offended? What stops me from being offended at other situations, such as clothing choice or whatnot.

On another side note, my brother could not get his truck inspected b/c of "obscene language" displayed on his rear windshield...I see that as violation of his free speach too.

Hmmm. Intresting.


----------



## Sustainer (Sep 26, 2002)

A law against ANNOYING people? Yeah, I'd say that's unconstitutional.


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

Edited (deleted) because I decided I ought to leave my concerns for private message conversations. For one thing, they were off topic. However, I might just point out that saying someone "lacks class" (a common term) is a more apporpriate statement than the statement that someone is "low class" because of their behavior. One is a classist statement, the other is a classist based term that is commonly used without being classist.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MyBabiesCome1st*
I really do not want to test the laws, but how do you interpret this law? http://members.aol.com/StatutesP7/18PA5503.html

The way I am understanding this is they can validate "use obscene language" is b/c it can be offensive...but do we really have the right to be offended? What stops me from being offended at other situations, such as clothing choice or whatnot.

I just checked the annotated statutes and it looks as though the subsection dealing with obscene language is limited to "coarse or indecent utterances" or "abusive language." In other words, language that contemporary standards would consider obscene (which is in line with the definition of obscenity, a class of speech that is given no protection) and language that abuses another person.

It does seem ambiguous - and may be being applied indiscriminately (although I don't know what's on your brother's truck), but it doesn't look as though simply uttering expletives in public is going to get you temporary lodging at the county's expense.


----------



## MissSugarKane (Jun 19, 2003)

Am I the only one that still thinks this is a joke thread?


----------



## dallaschildren (Jun 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MissSugarKane*
Am I the only one that still thinks this is a joke thread?










Nope. You are not.


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Sugarkane and dallas...I am the OP on this thread, and I GUARANTEE YOU that this is NOT a "joke thread". And I am very offended that you think so !
I came in here to ask peoples' opinions and I certainly don't need you coming in here and saying it's all a joke, thank you very much !


----------



## MissSugarKane (Jun 19, 2003)

Well after reading your other posts I just have a hard time believing you are for real.But I should just keep that to myself and not but into your thread.Sorry about that, continue on.


----------



## solstar (May 26, 2002)

It just seems like this and some other posts you have made are very inflammatory.
Having been online many years some of us know people who post with a certain style usually end up not being who they say they are.

That being said, I have known many people IRL who would agree with everything you have posted about how you raise your children.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

_moderator's note:_

I would like to request that people please refrain from casting judgement on the OP's motivations (re: joke or serious). She has already addressed this point several pages back, and it is now bordering on a direct insult to her to continue with this line of discussion.

Please let's take the discussion for what it is at face value, and leave the judgement calls elsewhere. Besides, even if it were a joke (which I know it isn't), the ensuing discussion it has sparked is still obviously of interest to many.

Thank you.


----------



## cch (May 4, 2004)

.


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

My GRANDPARENTS frequently washed my mouth out with soap, which did seem strange to me since my parents both swore, and even did so in front of my grandparents, and nothing was ever said to them, especially since they knew my parents allowed me (and my sibs) to swear in front of them. If I originally left the impression that my parents did that, then that was incorrect. I find it amazing that some people would continue to believe that my zoo shirt story was a joke/lie...it WASN'T ! The incident occured and should stand on its own merit. As I stated before, I was merely relating an incident that happened (for real !) and asking for an opinion from the MDCF members...nothing sinister or mean was EVER intended or indicated in anything I wrote about the event ! I feel I have conducted myself very well in the light of some...let's face it...rather mean-spirited comments. Why do a few of you insist on jumping on me for a simple request for an opinion?

I also have never once said that I allow my boys to indiscriminately swear in public ! In all posts I have said that I have told my boys that some people would find it offensive. However, as I stated before, it truly did not occur to me that the shirt would cause such a stir at the zoo (nor in here).


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

moderator's warning:

*If this thread continues to be a "bash the OP" discussion, it will be closed.*


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Thank you, Piglet ! I don't want to see it closed, because I feel it has been a good discussion, whether people agree with me or not. But I certainly appreciate the "no-bashing" warning, because THAT part of it is getting tiring, I must admit. Can we TRY to keep it open for awhile longer for those who truly want to discuss the issues raised (most of which I NEVER dreamed would come about !) ?


----------



## solstar (May 26, 2002)

To keep it on topic- is this the shirt?
http://coshops.com/stores_app/images...proverbBIG.jpg

and sort of OT but curious: Shann do you practice TCS?


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Solstar, no that's not the shirt...same saying, but the shirt my son has is much more elaborately decorated and the writing is not nearly that easy to read.
As for the other part of your question, excuse my ignorance, but I'm not familiar with what TCS is. Sorry.


----------



## asimonte (May 9, 2004)

I don't see a problem with it. I would've pitched a fit. Even if it is a TAD inappropriate for his age, I don't think that it should be up to the zoo to decide.


----------



## Shann (Dec 19, 2003)

Asimonte, very succintly put ! That is my point exactly ! Thank you ! Except for the part where you said it was a little age-inappropriate, I agree completely !


----------



## MissSugarKane (Jun 19, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *asimonte*
I don't think that it should be up to the zoo to decide.

Why shouldn't it if it is their property?It is not public property.

And to the original OP if you want to let your chilrdren swear and wear offensive shirts then you have to expect it is going to cause problems outside of the home.If you agree with it or not most people don't find that shirt or swearing from a 7 year old appropriate.I think the zoo incedent is only the first of many to come.


----------



## asimonte (May 9, 2004)

If there are no written rules, then it's hard for them to say 'it's a rule'. Last time I checked, places like zoos are open to the public. The property may belong to someone, but if they open it to the public, it's now a public place, IMO.

I'm not saying that the shirt is right or wrong. I'm just saying that unless they have posted rules, they can't hardly just pick and choose what and when they will be enforcing these non-written rules.

Where would they draw the line? What if my DH wore a Budweiser shirt to the zoo? Would that be unappropriate too?


----------



## BunnysMomma (Dec 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *asimonte*
If there are no written rules, then it's hard for them to say 'it's a rule'. Last time I checked, places like zoos are open to the public. The property may belong to someone, but if they open it to the public, it's now a public place, IMO.

I'm not saying that the shirt is right or wrong. I'm just saying that unless they have posted rules, they can't hardly just pick and choose what and when they will be enforcing these non-written rules.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but in this case the law does not back you up. A business is absolutely allowed to create their own rules (as long as they are not discriminating against federally protected classes of people solely on the basis of the characteristic that is federally protected). Just because a business is open to the public does not make it a public place. It is still a private establishment. And yes, a private establishment can pick and choose when and how they will enforce their rules, regardless of whether they are posted or not. As long as they are not discriminating against those federally protected classes or creating rules that are intended to discriminate against just one person (such as "Seven-year-olds named Stephen may not wear shirts with swear words on them, but all other seven-year-olds can"), proprietors of a private establishment can ask any patron to leave at any time and for any reason. (The reason I know all this is because my husband and I are the proprietors of a private establishment that is open to the public.)

Wilma


----------



## scorpioqueen (Apr 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Shann*
Sugarkane and dallas...I am the OP on this thread, and I GUARANTEE YOU that this is NOT a "joke thread". And I am very offended that you think so !
I came in here to ask peoples' opinions and I certainly don't need you coming in here and saying it's all a joke, thank you very much !

I too am kinda wondering exactly what is going on, Its not that I think something didn't happen but I find it REALLY suprising anyone would be shocked that others would think its inappropiate for a 7 year old to wear such a shirt.
On another point others OP included have related that these are just words but this is only half way true, yes they are words but these words have meanings, words can be VERY powerful tools so please don't say there just words.
DK


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

Sorry, Piglet, but you are right.

I won't write in a judgemental fashion against the OP.

Her post speaks for itself and I believe people can use their own discernment.

DB


----------



## happyhippiemama (Apr 1, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BunnysMomma*
I grew up in an Amish community, and I absolutely believe that their emphasis on selflessness is the right cultural path to take.

Wilma

Edited to add that by "grew up in an Amish community" I meant that I was raised in an Amish family. I have, however, left the faith.









T

Hey Wilma, you did? My grandparents were Amish, converted to Mennonitism, in which I was raised.... and I've left Mennonitism by now, too.


----------



## frand (May 8, 2004)

Why would there be a warning about this post being closed if people continue to exercise their FREE SPEECH in terms of questioning the OP? I didn't see a single offensive comment, just some pretty polite questions of validity. I know the answer in principle but I am just asking because the irony is hard to ignore...the whole question here was one of free speech, the people who are defending the OP have done so on the principles of free speech, so perhaps Piglet unintentionally made the point that many others have tried to make-- in every forum in life there ARE limits of what's acceptable and when you don't know what they are, sometimes someone has the thankless task of letting you know. Shann wasn't asked to leave for breastfeeding or a Budweiser T shirt. Let's not make equations that DID NOT HAPPEN.

Piglet, going by Shann's logic from her original post, I guess this makes you a rent-a-cop too because you are tasked with maintaining Mothering's standards of acceptable discourse or shutting us down... (that rent-a-cop comment probably bothered me as much as the shirt in the OP)







:

If it's ok to close this thread because of offensive posts (a policy I agree with) then what is the problem with what the zoo did?


----------



## Yinsum (Jan 12, 2003)

First I apologize because I have not read the entire thread and may repeat what's been said. Yes we do have rights and freedoms, but with rights come responsibilty. We may have the right to wear a shirt with explicit pornography or perhaps a graphic murder scene. Yet don't we also have a responsibilty to the community in which we belong? For me personally such graphic shirts go far beyond acceptible for public display. Yet there may be some folk out there the say "why not?" I'm not a lawyer I can't argue the legality of the incident. I do believe as previously posted the option to turn the shirt inside out, a refund or rain check should have been offered. However, I feel that sometimes we are so caught up in the "I's and ME's " that we forget we belong to a community. I know we have Freedom of Speech in the UNITED States, but when we get so carried away with what we want its as though it should be the I STATES


----------



## jeca (Sep 21, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *frand*
Why would there be a warning about this post being closed if people continue to exercise their FREE SPEECH in terms of questioning the OP? I didn't see a single offensive comment, just some pretty polite questions of validity. I know the answer in principle but I am just asking because the irony is hard to ignore...the whole question here was one of free speech, the people who are defending the OP have done so on the principles of free speech, so perhaps Piglet unintentionally made the point that many others have tried to make-- in every forum in life there ARE limits of what's acceptable and when you don't know what they are, sometimes someone has the thankless task of letting you know. Shann wasn't asked to leave for breastfeeding or a Budweiser T shirt. Let's not make equations that DID NOT HAPPEN.

Piglet, going by Shann's logic from her original post, I guess this makes you a rent-a-cop too because you are tasked with maintaining Mothering's standards of acceptable discourse or shutting us down... (that rent-a-cop comment probably bothered me as much as the shirt in the OP)







:

If it's ok to close this thread because of offensive posts (a policy I agree with) then what is the problem with what the zoo did?

WOW! good point!!!


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but in this case the law does not back you up. A business is absolutely allowed to create their own rules (as long as they are not discriminating against federally protected classes of people solely on the basis of the characteristic that is federally protected). Just because a business is open to the public does not make it a public place. It is still a private establishment. And yes, a private establishment can pick and choose when and how they will enforce their rules, regardless of whether they are posted or not. As long as they are not discriminating against those federally protected classes or creating rules that are intended to discriminate against just one person (such as "Seven-year-olds named Stephen may not wear shirts with swear words on them, but all other seven-year-olds can"), proprietors of a private establishment can ask any patron to leave at any time and for any reason.
THANK YOU!!! I haven't checked back in on this thread for awhile, and am amazed that people are still debating the issue of free speech. I'm shocked that some people still think that their 'right to free speech' means they can say anything anywhere. I personally don't care what shirt another kid wears, but it is not protected under any free speech laws when you are on private property, i.e., property owned by a private entity. And even if you are on government property, they are still allowed to have guidelines about appropriate behavior. This does not fall under protection of free speech as defined in the constitution.

It seems that our highschool civics/government/history classes have not done a very good job at educating the U.S. public about the constitution and what it really means.


----------



## napless (Mar 20, 2003)

I have a question for the OP - and I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious and looking for clarification. (I've read most but not all of the posts and I apologize if you've answered this already). Shann - did you think, when you went out in public with your son wearing that shirt, that some people would be offended by it?


----------



## MelMel (Nov 9, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
Actually, the humor is based on the assumption that Asian proverbs are generally profound and insightful, and yet it turns out to be an American pop culture phrase. So it's actually a compliment, if you think about it. So I'm not really surprised that Shann's Asian friends are not offended by it.

nak

people around here (in Cleveland) are surprised Native Americans are offended by the logo of 'chief wahoo', as the name and logo were changed many years ago to 'honor' a Native American player. it doesnt matter what its based on. it failed miserably in its compliment.

its a stretch, and off topic, but so is this whole thread


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Well, Frand, one difference is that, in order to register here, one must read and agree to the terms of the User Agreement. So at least, in this case, nobody can argue that they weren't warned before they "bought their ticket".









Plus, I think that this is a good example of the "responsibilities" part of the "right to free speech" issue that has been brought up by many on this thread. Yes, you are free to speak your mind, but if people do so in a way that is hurtful to others, that just isn't cool. Rights or no rights.

I honestly believe that every point can be worded differently, so that even an "offensive" post can be "fixed" with the right use of wording and tact. There are ways of getting a point across without being hurtful. Thus, people should not feel restricted here in WHAT they say, it's HOW they say it that matters....

.....in theory.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

I think Frand has a point, Piglet.

I regard the folk here at Mothering to be an openminded and diverse lot yet we are all perfectly willing to dialogue and conduct ourselves within the confines of DECENCY.

Not a novel concept the alternative is anarchy.

I prefer the assumption of a decent and respectful environment.

Here at Mothering and in a public venue such as the zoo.

Debra Baker


----------



## MelMel (Nov 9, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly*
Regarding cursing - people are taking offense on it being called ignorant. You can choose to use it and view it however you want but you have to realize that there are many people (myself included) who will hear you use it and think you are ignorant, uneducated and trashy. Personally if I am out in public and I hear someone so "Oh fuck this shit" I would immediately think 1) they are trashy, 2) they are uneducated and 3) they are low class.


as someone who is uneducated (well, i have a GED







) trashy, and 'low class' (thats like lower class, like low income, right?) I take offense to being lumped along with people who use the "F" word (which i do not, as i already have enough going against me)








:


----------



## MelMel (Nov 9, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sbf*
The ONLY comparison I made between wearing a profane shirt and breastfeeding is that there are people who are offended by both. Can anyone really dispute that?

I'm concerned about the precedent it sets when a place of public accomodation is allowed to ban something based on the fact that it offends people.

Incidentally, I'm not saying that I would wear the shirt myself, it just seems like some people are over-reacting to it a bit.

Also, I wish there were more concern about censorship.

i totally get you on this.
about the breastfeeding, everything. if the shirt just had 'fuck this shit' on it, whatever. i dont care. free speech. but because of the cultural connection. I would never wear it. BUT i wouldnt walk up to someone, EVEN a family member, and call them on it. just like baseball logos and such, i dont bother. its too obscure for them to 'get' without me looking like a nut and ruining my credibility for things that really matter.
but because it was brought up, in this thread, about the shirt and the problem with it, the cultural implications are also being brought up......so while it may be over reacting, its understandable considering all the turns this thread has taken.

for the record, i think shan shoudda got her cash back.

oh, and by the way, i also agree with whoever said on page 1 or 2 that the zoo itself is a crappy example of a family environment. being so inhumane and commercial (well, our local zoo is, with gift shops every hundred feet and a McDonalds and Pizza Hut) we partake, but know full well that it doesnt promote any 'family values' i would want to instill.


----------



## MelMel (Nov 9, 2002)

okay, my sister asked what I have been reading while my sweaty, drooly kid is asleep and still nursing for the last hour...I told her the OP issue, and she asked 'why is that the kids favorite shirt?'

I hope thats not a personal attack or anything. does he like the style of writing? does he like that when he first got it, it made mom and dad laugh or their eyes get wide?
now, we are pretty offensive to most people (and I mean without blatantly trying, like wearing shirts with potty humor on them) and laid back to an extent...it really seems like someone is trying really hard to be shocking, and to all of us who are naturally shocking, its sorta a poser thing to do. :LOL

okay, I am done. I have read through to the end! took 3 days off and on.


----------



## solstar (May 26, 2002)

Shann,
TCS= Taking Children Seriously
http://www.takingchildrenseriously.com/


----------



## Kincaid (Feb 12, 2004)

_*temporarily removed by moderator*_


----------



## Mother2Amaya (Jun 4, 2004)

Well I'm late in the game but I think it is a catch-22. It is just as much the zoo's right to throw you out as it is a right for your son to wear the shirt. People in America can do what they want, basically. It's just a catch-22 overall and that's why it's such an argument and hard to figure out because both you AND the zoo are right in your decisions.


----------

