Younger but more arrogant crowd this year?

[DeanoL]

It would be a bit like people wearing fake war medals in Britain as a fashion accessory.

I'd argue that shouldn't bother people either. If a bunch of white teenage girls go around wearing war medals at Glastonbury, is anyone going to mistake them for war veterans? Same applies to headdresses, there's no passing off going on there. Also I'd imagine the designs are different, as you can stop people wearing the design of your tribe / your war medal by just not selling it. If someone rips it off, there are already legal avenues in place to sue for copyright infringement over the design.

[DeanoL]

Yeh it is.

It would be more comparable if Britain had lost the war to Germany, and they still occupied Britain today, and it was the German occupiers wearing British medals as fashion accessories.

You mean like how hundreds of films and video games portray Nazi's as villains, anything from competent and evil to bumbling idiots?

[progue]

But there is challenging it by having a dialogue with people and asking why they feel it is sacred for example I think the main issue with Indian Headdress is that it is something earned within their culture rather than something just anyone is entitled to wear. It would be a bit like people wearing fake war medals in Britain as a fashion accessory.

It is not challenging something to simply dismiss their concerns and say 'I do what I want sod how other people feel about it'.

Do people not already wear fake war medals and uniforms in any case. I'm not too convinced I know anyone at all that would find that offensive...I suppose my grandfather might, but he also took issue with folk buying a Japanese TV and I'd like to hope that we have moved on somewhat.

People kind of need to get over themselves and realise that something you dangle around your neck, stick in your hair or paint on your face is really not something that they should be choosing to use as a means of defining them as a person.

If the head-dress is a symbol of one mans domination in a hierarchical structure over another man in any case, it would seem to be a little bit of an ironic argument in the first instance really. Likewise as I mentioned earlier that little respect seems to have been shown to the living creatures that, in particular, the Native American regalia actually came from in the first place.

So these are emblems that are there to identify a mans domination over other men or animals...hmmm.,..How far do you go with it all?

[Ruwise]

I am simply saying that by the same token, we also have the option to be offended by things and more importantly hurt ourselves in the process, that we need not allow ourselves to be hurt by. In other words we simply make a conscious decision not to allow those people who are, by their nature, inconsiderate or bigoted to affect us. For one thing it immediately removes any power or control they may have over you as an individual.

Of course we can also make a conscious choice to challenge and change those peoples opinions, but we do not 'need' to allow ourselves to be hurt or damaged in the process, nor even to bear any malice towards the person who holds the opinion.

So as a woman I have the option of not being offended by rape culture or the fact that equal pay still doesn't exist or that the very fact of saying somebody does something like a girl or that people should man up cements the position that women are less than men.

Words and actions have consequences. If you don't pull people up on the things that they say and do that you find inappropriate then we don't move forward and evolve as a society.

[progue]

So as a woman I have the option of not being offended by rape culture or the fact that equal pay still doesn't exist or that the very fact of saying somebody does something like a girl or that people should man up cements the position that women are less than men.

Words and actions have consequences. If you don't pull people up on the things that they say and do that you find inappropriate then we don't move forward and evolve as a society.

Yes you most definitely have that option to not allow yourself to be hurt in any way by the words of others.

Edited July 2, 2014 by progue

[Ruwise]

I really don't have that option. Getting promoted is harder for women than men. Being taken seriously in some offices can be more difficult. Men don't have to deal with street harassment in the same way that women do. it is nice in theory to say just don't be offended but it does definitely comes from a place of privilege. I've never heard a man say to another man in the office you should be making my tea and that is a very minor example.

Follow everyday sexism on twitter for a couple of weeks and come back and tell me that women can just not get offended at sexual harassment and abuse.

[progue]

I really don't have that option. Getting promoted is harder for women than men. Being taken seriously in some offices can be more difficult. Men don't have to deal with street harassment in the same way that women do. it is nice in theory to say just don't be offended but it does definitely comes from a place of privilege. I've never heard a man say to another man in the office you should be making my tea and that is a very minor example.

Follow everyday sexism on twitter for a couple of weeks and come back and tell me that women can just not get offended at sexual harassment and abuse.

Look I am not suggesting that sexual discrimination doesn't exist or that harassment of women does not exist. Though I do disagree that men cannot be harassed and they are not also manipulated, abused and oppressed by women on a significant scale both in private and working lives, which gets very limited recognition simply because such a man might be viewed as weak or inferior. I take it you have not seen the Facebook films raising awareness of these issues.

Additionally male parents have also been and still are discriminated against in matters of child custody.

The fact remains however that we make a conscious choice to allow such things to actually hurt us and we can make a conscious choice not to allow that to happen.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you think the benefit to you of being offended and hurt by the words of someone actually is....If there isn't one then what is the point?

[JGP]

Lots of people pushing through crowds with no consideration or sorrys this year. I always say excuse me when I need to do it- where are the manners?

This drove me mad

[mrpman]

On the original point, I thought there were lots less idiots (of all ages) than last year, but the pissing is now rife all over.

Stewards seemed to turn a blind eye a few times (I'm thinking maybe 5 times that I saw where they could have intervened) and I saw security going up and making a few people feel idiots by being stood there when they turned around - would people support a "one strike and out policy" on the pissing front? I think I probably would, there is just no need for it!

Generally though I was possibly far drunker/hammered than usual, so maybe I just didn't notice as many idiots as usual.

[Ruwise]

Look I am not suggesting that sexual discrimination doesn't exist or that harassment of women does not exist. Though I do disagree that men cannot be harassed and they are not also manipulated, abused and oppressed by women on a significant scale both in private and working lives, which gets very limited recognition simply because such a man might be viewed as weak or inferior. I take it you have not seen the Facebook films raising awareness of these issues.

Additionally male parents have also been and still are discriminated against in matters of child custody.

The fact remains however that we make a conscious choice to allow such things to actually hurt us and we can make a conscious choice not to allow that to happen.

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you think the benefit to you of being offended and hurt by the words of someone actually is....If there isn't one then what is the point?

The benefit is you raise awareness of a issue and hopefully change it. I once just though of Indian Headdresses as pretty objects but heard that people were offended and read up on it and understand why they are now and I would choose not to buy or wear them because of this. I like to think that if I tell enough men that catcalling for example is not seen as a compliment by the majority of women and that even if you know one person who doesn't mind it the fact that several others will feel intimidated and less secure as a result would make most reasonable men realise it's not a good thing to do.

I'm not homosexual but I will challenge homophobia because I think it's unacceptable if enough people do this then the small minded bigots shut up. When people say they are offended it doesn't necessarily mean they are crying themselves to sleep at night just that they don't want to hear or see certain types of behaviour in society.

[DeanoL]

I'd be interested in knowing exactly what you think the benefit to you of being offended and hurt by the words of someone actually is....If there isn't one then what is the point?

You can't control being offended, that's the point. Offense is taken, it's not a considered choice. It's an emotion, it's feeling bad upon seeing something, whether that be reasonable or not.

What we have here is people who aren't actually offended by what people are wearing, looking at it, looking at the views of other people on similar things, putting two and two together, and choosing to be offended on their behalf. That's very different.

[progue]

The benefit is you raise awareness of a issue and hopefully change it. I once just though of Indian Headdresses as pretty objects but heard that people were offended and read up on it and understand why they are now and I would choose not to buy or wear them because of this. I like to think that if I tell enough men that catcalling for example is not seen as a compliment by the majority of women and that even if you know one person who doesn't mind it the fact that several others will feel intimidated and less secure as a result would make most reasonable men realise it's not a good thing to do.

I'm not homosexual but I will challenge homophobia because I think it's unacceptable if enough people do this then the small minded bigots shut up. When people say they are offended it doesn't necessarily mean they are crying themselves to sleep at night just that they don't want to hear or see certain types of behaviour in society.

But challenging or attempting to positively influence someone else's opinion is something completely different to allowing something to offend or hurt you and even to dislike someone as a result of something they wear or say to you.

Edited July 2, 2014 by progue

[neilloggie]

I don't think anyone was actually causing anyone 'misery' by wearing a head-dress and I wasn't 'hurt' or 'offended' by it - but on the sliding scale of cool / not cool for me they're a bit over the line into 'not cool'.

Still, though - the Native Americans are a great bunch of lads.

As kids we are brought up on fancy dress and i don't think it ever leaves some people, maybe people shouldn't wear them, but then again if people are selling them, people will always buy them.

Is part of the problem that there aren't any similar British symbols that have the same sort of cultural significance, so people don't understand how wearing them inappropriately can be offensive.

I was trying to think of a British equivalent but closest I could come up with would be the poppy or maybe military medals, but think that would be mostly the daily mail crowd that would get upset so still doubt that applies to the people wearing the headresses.

Army surplus camouflage? and to a certain extent The George Cross is becoming offensive to some people.

[DeanoL]

The benefit is you raise awareness of a issue and hopefully change it. I once just though of Indian Headdresses as pretty objects but heard that people were offended and read up on it and understand why they are now and I would choose not to buy or wear them because of this. I like to think that if I tell enough men that catcalling for example is not seen as a compliment by the majority of women and that even if you know one person who doesn't mind it the fact that several others will feel intimidated and less secure as a result would make most reasonable men realise it's not a good thing to do.

I'm not homosexual but I will challenge homophobia because I think it's unacceptable if enough people do this then the small minded bigots shut up. When people say they are offended it doesn't necessarily mean they are crying themselves to sleep at night just that they don't want to hear or see certain types of behaviour in society.

Homophobia and sexism are bigotry, they stem from hate or failure to understand something different. It's not in the same ballpark as someone wearing something they think looks nice, and other people getting offended at that because it's something they like to wear and they want it to themselves.

As a woman, I'd guess you're not offended by men cross-dressing? And gay people aren't generally offended by straight people dressing flamboyantly (although, crucially, some are, and everyone seems to agree those people are being ridiculous).

To come at it from another angle, remember about, oh, all of 5-10 years ago, when a lot of employers and schools would not let girls/women wear trousers, as they were mens' clothes and women shouldn't be wearing them? And how silly and oppressive that seems now? Should we not have campaigned against that and instead accepted that trousers were part of male culture, and it wasn't appropriate for women to have them?

[progue]

You can't control being offended, that's the point. Offense is taken, it's not a considered choice. It's an emotion, it's feeling bad upon seeing something, whether that be reasonable or not.

What we have here is people who aren't actually offended by what people are wearing, looking at it, looking at the views of other people on similar things, putting two and two together, and choosing to be offended on their behalf. That's very different.

No mate it is certainly a considered choice to be offended. It is the reaction that people have been conditioned to have in response to a particular set of circumstances, but it is definitely possible to strip all that away or at least that is what I have been led to believe by people who appear to have far more control over their emotions and ability to be offended than I do lol.

There are individuals out there who do not even understand the concept of being offended.

[Ruwise]

No mate it is certainly a considered choice to be offended. It is the reaction that people have been conditioned to have in response to a particular set of circumstances, but it is definitely possible to strip all that away or at least that is what I have been led to believe by people who appear to have far more control over their emotions and ability to be offended than I do lol.

There are individuals out there who do not even understand the concept of being offended.

I don't think it is a considered choice I think people have different personalities and some people don't care as much about social issues as others do.

I am not offended on behalf of other people by the wearing of Indian Headdresses as I know most people are just ignorant to the issues behind it but I personally would not wear them because I do know how some people feel about it and I wouldn't choose to knowingly offend somebody by wearing something. I just don't care enough about fashion to do that.

[Ruwise]

Homophobia and sexism are bigotry, they stem from hate or failure to understand something different. It's not in the same ballpark as someone wearing something they think looks nice, and other people getting offended at that because it's something they like to wear and they want it to themselves.

As a woman, I'd guess you're not offended by men cross-dressing? And gay people aren't generally offended by straight people dressing flamboyantly (although, crucially, some are, and everyone seems to agree those people are being ridiculous).

To come at it from another angle, remember about, oh, all of 5-10 years ago, when a lot of employers and schools would not let girls/women wear trousers, as they were mens' clothes and women shouldn't be wearing them? And how silly and oppressive that seems now? Should we not have campaigned against that and instead accepted that trousers were part of male culture, and it wasn't appropriate for women to have them?

As a woman I'd welcome all men being forced to cross dress a lot of the time just so they would learn to have less ridiculous ideal about what they like women to wear.

As for the issue with employers and schools I believe that was less about women wearing men's clothes and more about trying to keep women in women's clothes. I would happily support any man's right to wear a skirt. None of these are the same as the Indian Headdress issue though where not even all Native American Indians wear them as they are earned through their place in society. Go down your local British Legion wearing fake war medals and see how people react to that there. Tell them that you want to wear them because you think it makes you look pretty and tell me what they think of you.

[progue]

I don't think it is a considered choice I think people have different personalities and some people don't care as much about social issues as others do.

I am not offended on behalf of other people by the wearing of Indian Headdresses as I know most people are just ignorant to the issues behind it but I personally would not wear them because I do know how some people feel about it and I wouldn't choose to knowingly offend somebody by wearing something. I just don't care enough about fashion to do that.

But it must be a considered choice, because other people have managed to rid themselves of their own ego to a point where they are not even offended by the most horrific of actions towards them, never mind whether or not someone wears a silly head-dress made of dead animal parts.

You mentioned something like catcalling or wolf whistling...What if we all simply chose to view that as something positive? Why would it then still be a problem?

Does the cat or the rabbit or the spider become offended by a sexual advance?

These things are simply a figment of our imagination.

Is saying hello to each other a problem? It might be if we chose to create a problem with people who said hello and suggested that they might be intimidating or invasive...In fact it actually has become a problem for some people...Will we eventually need to stop people interacting with each other altogether?

It only becomes a problem when someone decides, for whatever reason, to place some form of negative attachment to the action or chooses to view it in a negative context. Once that happens then you reach a point where the lines between people acting in that particular way become blurred and as such you create a negative out of a positive.

[progue]

As a woman I'd welcome all men being forced to cross dress a lot of the time just so they would learn to have less ridiculous ideal about what they like women to wear.

As for the issue with employers and schools I believe that was less about women wearing men's clothes and more about trying to keep women in women's clothes. I would happily support any man's right to wear a skirt. None of these are the same as the Indian Headdress issue though where not even all Native American Indians wear them as they are earned through their place in society. Go down your local British Legion wearing fake war medals and see how people react to that there. Tell them that you want to wear them because you think it makes you look pretty and tell me what they think of you.

How the hell can you earn the right to defile the body of another living creature and utilise that as a means of dominating other people?

[frostypaw]

What about the EU and their straight bananas?

I so got there first several pages back.

This has got really interesting while i've been away from my keyboard great points.

I think offense is a choice - we choose not to be offended when a rapper says nigger, but I bet you just twitched when I typed it. Every response to every word, every sight is a conditioned and learnt reaction - no different to the cat scarpering when it hears plastic bags.

Doesn't make it always unreasonable, but does mean it's not a helpless thing. I'm a gay guy... I have to deal with the fact I work with a slew of big burly blokes who are used to using 'gay' and 'fag' as insults - took them two years to stop entirely, there was no point in me taking massive offence so I didn't - but used in anger I would have.

*opens can of worms*

Since someone mentioned it - I find the men-in-drag thing very disturbing. It's commonly accepted as something 'funny' and it's commonplace as much in the gay world - but I think it's incredibly offensive and find it disgusting. People in drag don't pretend to be proper normal women - they are always hideous parodies taking the piss being bitches, being overtly sexual and massively overdressed....

So change the context. Go dressed as an Asian with sellotape to make your eyes slits and a coolie hat and go performing all the worst of the stereotypes of how asians behave... let's see how funny that is.

When I meet crossdressers who actually act like real women I always have to thank them, it doesn't happen often.

[pjadnoo]

My two cents (although I'm probably way too late to the table, so feel free to ignore):

While the recent resurgence of using culturally & spiritually significant items as throw-away fashion is, in my opinion, distateful and I can fully understand why people would be offended, I think there's a problem with saying things along the lines of "you just shouldn't do things that offend people".

The problem is that, ultimately, most things you do -important or otherwise- will offend some group. Whether we choose to do it anyway depends on our values, how important that thing is to us, and how our values compare to the group that we might be offending. In the extreme (admittedly something of a straw man), I suspect that a lot of what happens at Glastonbury deeply offends some religious fanatics or fascists but we choose to ignore that, even though they have as much right to be offended as anyone else.

The other big problem is that the question of offence is so subjective that -even in seemingly clear-cut issues- it's a fairly grey area. If you take the native american headdress discussion, the question of a young white Brit wearing one to a festival might be 'clear cut', but where is the line drawn? Is it your ancestry that's important... what happens if your parents are native americans but you have been brought up in a completely westernised culture? Is it the things you, personally, have done... if I understand correctly, they were an honour after battle, so do you have to be a soldier? but of course modern conflict is nothing like that of a few hundred years ago. Alternatively, is it about showing respect when you wear it... but of course this isn't so easy to know (about others).

Don't get me wrong, if someone does something ignoring the offence it causes then they may well be acting like an asshole, but causing offence in itself isn't, in my opinion, a reason to stop something.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I think the focus on offence here is misleading.

I wasn't offended by the blacked up guy, the folk in headdresses or the bloke with the 'Just Piss Off Then' Scottish flag. I just thought they were a bit ignorant.

If you can rationalise your choices or provide a context that explains or justifies what you're doing a la Sadowitz or whoever then go for it, I say.

The fact that - when called on it - all that were offered up were pretty lame non-excuses doesn't offend me either - but it does cause me to think 'What a wally'.

[frostypaw]

The fact that - when called on it - all that were offered up were pretty lame non-excuses doesn't offend me either - but it does cause me to think 'What a wally'.

That's what I reckon a lot of the time.... It's just people not thinking and they not-think about a LOT of things, especially when partying it up

Now a blacked-up guy who pissed on the back of your legs and in your boots in a crowd, that's a dickhead we can all agree on

[pjadnoo]

Now a blacked-up guy who pissed on the back of your legs and in your boots in a crowd, that's a dickhead we can all agree on

Maybe he was a chimney sweep trying to put out a fire in his boots.

[DeanoL]

That's what I reckon a lot of the time.... It's just people not thinking and they not-think about a LOT of things, especially when partying it up

I think I kinda agree with that but I actually find that a good thing? That people without thinking, are happy to just take something from another culture and implement it in theirs, that's the holy grail of integration that's been worked at for a while. Does that mean those individual cultures will get diluted? Yes, probably. And again, I think that's great, but your mileage may vary.

No mate it is certainly a considered choice to be offended. It is the reaction that people have been conditioned to have in response to a particular set of circumstances, but it is definitely possible to strip all that away or at least that is what I have been led to believe by people who appear to have far more control over their emotions and ability to be offended than I do lol.

Probably have to agree to disagree on that one. I come at this topic mostly from the stand-up comedy industry, where you see two different patterns with 'offensive' jokes: a) act does offensive joke, audience are shocked/upset or b ) act does offensive joke, audience laugh, catch themselves in what they're laughing at, then act shocked/offended. I don't consider b ) to be actually taking offence. Distaste, maybe.

I don't think it is a considered choice I think people have different personalities and some people don't care as much about social issues as others do.

I am not offended on behalf of other people by the wearing of Indian Headdresses as I know most people are just ignorant to the issues behind it but I personally would not wear them because I do know how some people feel about it and I wouldn't choose to knowingly offend somebody by wearing something. I just don't care enough about fashion to do that.

Out of interest, are all your clothes (and food, and phone, etc) fair trade and ethically sourced? Because your position of not wearing Indian headdresses because it might upset some people is somewhat undermined if you're wearing trainers that some African kid died making. Kudos if it is, of course, but if not I think it's worth considering why you pick this issue to take a stand on, when all it does is 'offend' someone, and not make lifestyle changes elsewhere where people actually get badly hurt as a result of our consumption. It's generally because you didn't want to wear a headdress in the first place so it's an easy stand to take.

None of these are the same as the Indian Headdress issue though where not even all Native American Indians wear them as they are earned through their place in society. Go down your local British Legion wearing fake war medals and see how people react to that there. Tell them that you want to wear them because you think it makes you look pretty and tell me what they think of you.

Earned through their place in society? So they're the Native American equivalent of a fast car and a nice suit? We best be sure to respect that then. Also you keep calling them 'Indians' which I thought was actually classed as offensive these days?

(Sorry not trying to be a dick, I respect what you're trying to say, I just think it's worth questioning why we find ourselves in support of certain things and not other things, but am aware I argue quite aggressively!).

You mentioned something like catcalling or wolf whistling...What if we all simply chose to view that as something positive? Why would it then still be a problem?

The wolf whistle is a compliment. Unfortunately, because of centuries of oppression and a culture that has a huge problem with rape, it's acceptance, and how shockingly common it is, it's a compliment that comes with an inherent threat. Especially when it generally comes from strong, aggressive men. Find me a Native American that genuinely believes a 16-year-old girl wearing a headdress at Glastonbury is actually a precursor to her invading the remaining native lands and annexing them to Pilton and I'll concede the arguement.

Edited July 2, 2014 by DeanoL