We all know that Jews and Muslims alike are not allowed to eat pigs or any part of them. The unfortunate porker is neither Kosher nor Halal. It sounds like swinish prejudice to me. What have pigs ever done wrong? (OK: I know all about Maimonides, trichinosis etc.)
And, being one of those pesky libertarians, I am perfectly happy for people to eat or not eat whatever they like. I myself even occasionally commit the ultimate sin of dining at McDonalds and any food freak worth his salt (sea-salt, of course) would envisage an early death for me over that. But is even seeing a picture of a big Mac an offence? Isn't it the EATING of it that is bad? Does a picture of a big Mac do me any harm? Maybe it does. Because all pictures of pigs now seem set to be banned. Excerpt from a British report:
"Novelty pig calendars and toys have been banned from a council office - in case they offend Muslim staff. Workers in the benefits department at Dudley Council, West Midlands, were told to remove or cover up all pig-related items, including toys, porcelain figures, calendars and even a tissue box featuring Winnie the Pooh and Piglet. Bosses acted after a Muslim complained about pig-shaped stress relievers delivered to the council in the run-up to the Islamic festival of Ramadan".
Source
Oink! Oink! is my comment on that. See if you can come up with a better one.
What exactly is a pig-shaped stress-reliever anyway? My mind is quietly boggling as I try to imagine it. Does it vibrate or what?
And if you want to see something that is REALLY piggishly offensive, click here (backup here)
Can Something be Offensive if it Doesn't Actually Offend Anybody?
In PC Britain it can be, apparently. Note the following news excerpt about one of Britain's major art galleries: The Tate.
"Tate Britain "misunderstood" a piece of art it took out of a show to avoid religious offence, its creator said. The gallery cancelled plans to display John Latham's "God Is Great", concerned in particular that it could upset Muslims after London's 7 July bombings. Latham was angered by the decision and said that the work, made 10 years ago, was "not offensive to anybody". "It shows that all religious teaching comes from the same source, whatever name you give to it," he told BBC News. "God Is Great" consists of a large sheet of glass and copies of the Koran, the Bible and Judaism's Talmud that have been cut apart.
Source
Apparently the work concerned has been on display elsewhere for years and there have been no serious complaints. I myself don't like modern art so I might well complain about wasting public funds on it but nobody would take any notice of me. And apparently in this case, no actual Muslims were consulted before the work was removed and the Muslim Council of Britain has actually criticized the Tate's actions in removing the work.
I think self-congratulation on their "sensitivity" among the managers at the Tate was the real motive for the censorship. But you don't have to be censored. In line with my usual endeavours at defeating censorship, I have uploaded a copy of the "offending" artwork here in case the BBC take down their copy of it.
