POLICE follow this van ???

squack

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

YES you are overreacting...

I'd also say that the fact that you even took a racist message from that line says a lot about your inner thoughts and how you see the world... it had never even occurred to me that bananas = automatic racism.

Why do some people actively look for ways to take offence?

people need these days to actively look NOT to offend minorities, or those who will stand up for them against abuse and hatred :mad:

pka_2

squack wrote: »

Sorry folks I can see the funny side but I am a bit uneasy about the "no bananas in the van overnight" logo.

Although not a hate crime in itself of course, I think it could be construed as an insensitive and veiled racist statement, in that it presumes that those with a penchant for bananas would be thieving types likely to break into the van and steal them at night, were those specific fruit to remain in the vehicle.

Remember the bad old days when certain footballers had bananas thrown at them on the football pitch, and the August 2011 riots are still raw in the minds of many people. Have some respect.

I could imagine that if a black employee refused to drive the van with this slogan on, and was sacked, he would have good cause to sue for constructive dismissal and discrimination.

There is a wide range of other fruit available, maybe "pomegranates" would be too long a word to fit on the van, but bananas are too controversial to use as bait, people need to think through what they are writing before sticking it on a van for all to see and driving around in a multi cultural urban inner city environment.

Not "Plums" though as that fruit also has connotations and could upset yet another sector of our community.

not Melons either. nor Kumquats.

I believe sign written commercial vehicles are covered by the advertising standards authority who in the past have ruled that offensive signage be removed.

Am I over reacting or do I have a valid point.

Are you serious????

Tiddlywinks

squack wrote: »

people need these days to actively look NOT to offend minorities, or those who will stand up for them against abuse and hatred :mad:

Oh get a grip... there was no intention to offend with that remark on the van.

It is a comedy remark and bananas are a comedy fruit - it is just funnier to say 'bananas' than 'apples'.

Your ASSUME there will be offence because you are using your values and imposing those on others.

Reminding everyone of the bad old days is just picking at a scab which is best left alone to heal.

You see yourself as a crusader for the 'minorities'... I see you as misguided at best TBH.

squack

In the autumn I often drop a bag of spare fruit from my apple trees to a neighbour. (who happens to be white)

Could you go happily knock on a black guys door in the same way with a hand of fresh bananas from the plant in your conservatory ,and give them to him without bursting into the sort of laughter that follows an old jim davidson joke?

Bananas maybe loaded with potassium and other goodness, but in the wrong context they are also loaded with racist overtones

They are fine on the supermarket shelf but not thrown onto the football pitch

In this example they are also associated with potential theft of property from the van which is just more stereotyping

If I were a black guy walking past that fruit van and read "No bananas left in here overnight" I would feel inclined to put the window in

As a company vehicle they should have thought this through a bit better, that's all

Tiddlywinks

squack wrote: »

In the autumn I often drop a bag of spare fruit from my apple trees to a neighbour. (who happens to be white)

Could you go happily knock on a black guys door in the same way with a hand of fresh bananas from the plant in your conservatory ,and give them to him without bursting into the sort of laughter that follows an old jim davidson joke?

Bananas maybe loaded with potassium and other goodness, but in the wrong context they are also loaded with racist overtones

They are fine on the supermarket shelf but not thrown onto the football pitch

In this example they are also associated with potential theft of property from the van which is just more stereotyping

If I were a black guy walking past that fruit van and read "No bananas left in here overnight" I would feel inclined to put the window in

As a company vehicle they should have thought this through a bit better, that's all

So, now you're inferring that black men are more likely to commit a violent act at the mention of a particular piece of fruit?

I work in an area which is is well represented by 'people of colour'... I regularly eat bananas in their company and even offer them one from my bunch if I get a bargain bag from the local Sainsbury... in exactly the same way as I do if donuts are on sale or whatever... no tensions... no chuckling... it's a piece of fruit for goodness sake!

Lum

Well, I can see how the giving (or throwing) of bananas in the way that you describe could be seen as racist, but not the suggestion that a black person has a particular preference for bananas.

And now you are suggesting that a black person's preferred response to something that offends them would a criminal act, namely vandalism... oh dear.

squack

you white people can rationalise and justify all you like but put yourself in that guy's shoes, a legacy of slavery and oppression and now taunted by a crude supposedly jokey slogan on a van, have you learned nothing from the riots

Tiddlywinks

squack wrote: »

you white people can rationalise and justify all you like but put yourself in that guy's shoes, a legacy of slavery and oppression and now taunted by a crude supposedly jokey slogan on a van, have you learned nothing from the riots

So... are you saying that you are not white and you are offended?

You need to understand that your prejudices (as in pre-conceived ideas) are clouding how you see that statement on the van.

Or... you are winding us up... which I hope is what's happening.

Anyway, if the riots were about oppressed minorities (as opposed to a load of yobs looking for trouble) why did they all gravitate to Dixons and JJB to do a bit of 'shopping' on the way?

Lum

The riots that were in response to a white policeman shooting a black person... not even vaguely similar to the word !!!!!!! appearing on a fruit van.

This is the kind of thing that gives genuine political correctness a bad name. Yes there is plenty of oppression, racism and unfairness in this world which needs to be addressed, but when it's taken to extremes it gives the whole concept a bad name. Political Correctness is now a dirty word thanks to crap just like this.

Take, for example, that Daily Mail staple story about a council, school, or similar public institution that has chosen to ban Christmas decorations for fear of offending some minority, usually Muslims.

That decision is almost always made by a white British person, and not in response to a complaint. I've not met any Muslims who are offended by other religions celebrating their religious festivals, so the decision can only have been made based on the idea that Muslims are intolerant !!!!!holes who can't stand other faiths. While this may be true for a small minority who are currently stirring up trouble in Aghanistan, is is certainly not true for the majority and anyone who thinks it is are just showing their own prejudice.

The worst thing about this is, when it's reported, it's the minority in question who gets the blame and gets accused starting a war on British culture, when in reality it was caused by a white British person showing their prejudice.

Sometimes I wonder if, when things like this are done, is it some sort of sinister plot to discredit all forms of political correctness, including the ones that actually matter and would make a difference to the lot of oppressed minorities...

...now that really is oppressive.


Edit: LOL The word for a long yellow fruit that you unzip and eat the white bits got censored in this post. I guess someone at MSE agrees with Squack.

Lum

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Anyway, if the riots were about oppressed minorities (as opposed to a load of yobs looking for trouble) why did they all gravitate to Dixons and JJB to do a bit of 'shopping' on the way?

I've agreed with you up until now, but have to take issue with this one.

The riots were started over a genuine issue by people who were legitimately aggrieved by what happened. The fact that they were later hijacked by a bunch of yobs (many of whom were white) to go and do some shoplifting should not detract from the original issue that started it all.