« Wow | Main | One court. Two Ginsburgs? »


Is it just me, or does it seem like there's a new story like this one coming out of Britain every week or so? The current culprit is the hapless piggy bank. British banks are banning them because they offend Muslims.


I wish I could muster something like shock, or even suprise, at the willingness of the Brits to roll over on something like this.

Perhaps it just doesn't seem like a big deal to them; and in the grand scheme of things, it's probably not, by itself. The problem is, it's not by itself. It's one of a series of innocuous events that's quickly becoming a pattern, and the pattern is what should concern them.

The character Piglet, while a cultural icon of sorts, may not be critical to the identity of Britain. And you can put spare change in a container of any shape, it needn't be a pig. But at what point does a culture's willingness to subvert itself for the sake of others' "comfort" become self-destructive?

Most modern societies can agree that open display of a swastika is bound to offend someone, and not just the Jews. The Nazis are (with rare exceptions) pretty roundly accepted as bad guys, and their iconography is rightly rejected. Similarly, though to a lesser degree, I can understand the discomfort the Confederate flag causes in certain segments of American culture.

But unless I badly misread E.E. Cummings, Piglet wasn't known for wanton slaughter. That one culture happens to dislike pigs is their prerogative, but demanding that one's hosts change his ways for one's own comfort is not. Only a fool would defend a Brit expatriate's right to sell pulled pork sandwiches in Mecca, so why should one be any less foolish for enforcing Islamic standards in Britain?

apotheosis, I couldn't find anything that said that this was a change made as a result of anyone's demands. Nor does this phenomenon seem to extend beyond two banks.

The way I read this story: two banks were scared of losing business so they removed some pig-oriented imagery from their buildings and advertising.

So shame on them for being cowards. If people don't like this policy they can use other banks. No reason to condemn the entire country for it, though.

I was looking at this more as a follow-on to the "Piglet" controversy, which to my knowledge wasn't adversely affecting anyone's revenue.

But assuming that your suggestion is correct, the question becomes one of how far the society will go to make Islamic residents comfortable. These aren't big issues, but any such movement must start small.

For example; thirty years ago, the movement to remove Christian iconography from public lands around the holidays would've met pretty stiff resistance in most places around the United States, but today it's more or less accepted as a matter of course. A harmless tradition caused discomfort to a comparatively small but easily-offended segment of society, so the rights of the majority were curtailed in their favor.

apotheosis, you're good!

holy frijolé, I just read apotheosis' criticism on porn on his website. WOW! Totally on point!

Sorry to gush.

Yeah, it's downright sad, the lengths I'll go to for traffic.


Post a comment