Does this look offensive to you?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Well apparently, it is shocking enough for 4 UK supermarkets to sell in plain, brown wrappers!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8050110.stm

wtf?

[cowiz]

It looks like Lozzer after a good kicking

[Chinaski]

Bah, people are too easily offended. Far worse have been banned, though. Anything by Cannibal Corpse, mayhaps?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The stupid thing is, it is not even supposed to be a bloodied face! It just looks like it - it is the artists style.

[cowiz]

However, they should be banned for being Welsh

[Xamonas Chegwé]

However, they should be banned for being Welsh

Indisputable - but the wrong thread. We are discussing ridiculously over-protective, nannying wankers in charge of supermarkets here.

[charlou]

hmmm ... management in charge of supermarket weighing up the offense taken by those who object to images that 'appear' () gory or violent, against the offense taken by those who object to such images being covered up ... The former cannot 'unsee' the image while the latter can make the decision to remove the cover to see it. hmmm ... easy, understandable decision.


Not to mention the extra sales generated by making something appear controversial or taboo .... oooOOOooooo ....

[Xamonas Chegwé]

hmmm ... management in charge of supermarket weighing up the offense taken by those who object to images that 'appear' () gory or violent, against the offense taken by those who object to such images being covered up ... The former cannot 'unsee' the image while the latter can make the decision to remove the cover to see it. hmmm ... easy, understandable decision.


Not to mention the extra sales generated by making something appear controversial or taboo .... oooOOOooooo ....

Surely you are not implying cynicism on the part of the band or record company? For shame!

I just don't get how anyone could find that cover offensive in the slightest. I have seen this cover

on open display in Asda - one of the super markets involved.

[cowiz]

I was once suspended for a day for bringing this to school..



It was a Friday so I was chuffed to fucking bits.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

I was once suspended for a day for bringing this to school..



It was a Friday so I was chuffed to fucking bits.

That was back when a bollock was a bollock. it amazes me the things that are found to be offensive though. And the things that aren't.

This for example is a photo of human semen and bull's blood. yet this cover is not banned in Asda but a painting of a boy's face that merely looks as though it has blood on it, is!

[Kristie]

I was once suspended for a day for bringing this to school..



It was a Friday so I was chuffed to fucking bits.

That was back when a bollock was a bollock. it amazes me the things that are found to be offensive though. And the things that aren't.

This for example is a photo of human semen and bull's blood. yet this cover is not banned in Asda but a painting of a boy's face that merely looks as though it has blood on it, is!

To most people though, the Metallica artwork looks like flames or something. I never would've guessed the semen and blood stuff.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

To most people though, the Metallica artwork looks like flames or something. I never would've guessed the semen and blood stuff.

But you might have guessed that the RATM cover was a burning buddhist monk though - and that isn't banned either! Knee-jerk double standards annoy me so much - (especially my own on occasion.)

[Kristie]

To most people though, the Metallica artwork looks like flames or something. I never would've guessed the semen and blood stuff.

But you might have guessed that the RATM cover was a burning buddhist monk though - and that isn't banned either! Knee-jerk double standards annoy me so much - (especially my own on occasion.)

Actually, I couldn't tell WTF that was. Now that you mention it, I see what the image is supposed to be. And, if the image were as large as an album, I probably would've noticed right away.

[Trolldor]

I find this incredibly offensive.

[charlou]

To most people though, the Metallica artwork looks like flames or something. I never would've guessed the semen and blood stuff.

But you might have guessed that the RATM cover was a burning buddhist monk though - and that isn't banned either! Knee-jerk double standards annoy me so much - (especially my own on occasion.)

Actually, I couldn't tell WTF that was. Now that you mention it, I see what the image is supposed to be. And, if the image were as large as an album, I probably would've noticed right away.

I think a person would have to be looking at the burning monk image properly to tell what it is, not just glancing as they walk past, so it probably wouldn't generate many, if any complaints ... The cover in the op is more easily misinterpreted as something 'gory' or 'vile' and therefore offensive by those who just glance while walking past, in a WTF horrible thing is going on with that kid? kinda way. Humans seem to have a natural aversion to such things, and I'm not surprised people would complain (I don't agree with the complaints, just not surprised they're made) about the cover in the op. Irrational aversion and complaints, yes, but not abnormal, and therefore not uncommon ... rightly or wrongly ... heh, as if anyone can even justify placing such values as 'right' and 'wrong' on what people find offensive or are averse to (I'd like to see that).