Overly sensitive types or genuine distress?

[speedy_gonzales]

BBC are running a story >>LINK<< (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43027764) regarding a recent movie release, "Peter Rabbit" and a scene whereby the CGI animals round on the human character and fire blackberries at him even though he is allergic and requires his epi-pen at some point.
This scene seems to have upset some folk and I can't figure out if there is a genuine distress here or whether some people are being overly sensitive and protective over what is not that rare an ailment amongst the population.
NOW, i'm aware it's a kids movie (but then so was Paddington and I bet more adults have seen that than kids) and this is a form of bullying, but then I can't think of any comedy/CGI/Cartoon kids entertainment where there isn't some sort of "sticking it to the man" scene.
The standout quote from the article for me is "The charity Kids with Food Allergies Foundation said in a Facebook post "food allergy 'jokes' are harmful to our community".
EH? What community is this we're talking about, I've got family members allergic to dairy, nuts & strawberry and they're not aware of what this charity is talking about and don't see anything offensive in this movie.
Bearing in mind this a fictional account of CGI'd farm animals, how can offence be taken. Are we going to ban ALL potentially offensive acts from the movies, no violence, no swearing, no racism/sexism/ism's of any sort?

I reckon this post could slot in to other threads such as the "right to offend" and "things I don't get" but decided the content was that ridiculous it deserved it's own thread.

[lapsedhibee]

:lips seal

[nairn hibee]

I bought my son one of the old Tom &Jerry DVDs but had to take it from him after he swapped my cigar for a stick of dynamite

[danhibees1875]

I was quite surprised when I seen this in the news. Maybe I've totally missed the context though... Someone was being picked on by characters who were known as bullies.

Are the bad guys in films meant to do nothing to offend now? Even kids films need antagonists in them.

I don't really see how this happening in a cartoon could have caused that much offence to anyone.

[speedy_gonzales]

I was quite surprised when I seen this in the news. Maybe I've totally missed the context though... Someone was being picked on by characters who were known as bullies.

Are the bad guys in films meant to do nothing to offend now? Even kids films need antagonists in them.

I don't really see how this happening in a cartoon could have caused that much offence to anyone.
That's the point though, the "bullys" in this instance were the lead cartoon characters fighting back against the human protagonist who for all intensive purposes wanted to skin the rabbit known as Peter,,,,does good not rise against evil in most fictional stories?

[McD]

Its Interesting that there’s usually a character in kids movies who fits one or more of the following descriptions:

- fat
- ginger
- pasty skin colour
- dressed in tatty clothes
- athsmatic
- awful at sports
- geeky/nerdy/dweeby
- wears thick glasses

often these are a source of ridicule of varying degree during the movie, yet these never seem to get the righteous response described in the OP.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Since my wee nephew was born I've had to ask my mum to stop leaving cherry pies on the window sill to cool (my god, think of the carnage).

[hibsbollah]

I'm usually first to defend those accused of being perma offended or a snowflake (cringe), but this 'storm' seems to be beyond parody and totally ridiculous.

[RyeSloan]

I'm usually first to defend those accused of being perma offended or a snowflake (cringe), but this 'storm' seems to be beyond parody and totally ridiculous.

I think what’s worse is the snivelling grovelling response from Sony...these types of responses just encourage more of the same nonsense.

[beensaidbefore]

I would go for 'overly sensitive if pushed.

Seriously, I think this sums up where I was on the right to be offended thread. Absolute nonsense.

[Jack]

I would go for 'overly sensitive if pushed.

Seriously, I think this sums up where I was on the right to be offended thread. Absolute nonsense.

It's been said before ;-)

[McSwanky]

I haven't seen the movie but I have to say, what did Sony expect? In this day and age, they should have seen this coming. To use an EpiPen as a comedy vehicle is a bizarre choice, particularly in a kids' film.

Whether people are being over sensitive or not is neither here nor there in my opinion, the filmmakers have been more than a bit daft here.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

[Future17]

I would go for 'overly sensitive if pushed.

Seriously, I think this sums up where I was on the right to be offended thread. Absolute nonsense.

I think you'd be entitled to feel distressed if pushed, but it perhaps depends on how hard the push was, whether you fell over etc.

[Nameless]

I didn't realise this film had been released yet.

Sent from my D5503 using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

That's the point though, the "bullys" in this instance were the lead cartoon characters fighting back against the human protagonist who for all intensive purposes wanted to skin the rabbit known as Peter,,,,does good not rise against evil in most fictional stories?

Ah okay, I thought it was the bad guys being bad.

As someone with an allergy, I don't really see the big deal. I've actually had that happen to me in a jovial manner before - although I do think doing it in real life is too far as people can have worse reactions to things.

[jonty]

Sounds like the use of the epi-pen has taken it over the line and made it too 'real life'.

Sony shouldn't be relating to real life. they should leave that to Disney and Cinderella. And Star Wars.
They should leave rabbit abuse to Watership Down.

[heretoday]

If they'd have been throwing eyeballs at him I'd have been offended.

[lord bunberry]

It’s a load of ****ing pish.

[lapsedhibee]

Chain swears at customers

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-43169625

[RyeSloan]

Chain swears at customers

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-43169625

Ha ha that’s pretty good I think although not sure how it’s any different from the Irn Bru advert that seems to have created a bit of a stink.

[Aim Here]

I'm usually first to defend those accused of being perma offended or a snowflake (cringe), but this 'storm' seems to be beyond parody and totally ridiculous.

I doubt that it's because the cartoon is offensive so much as that kids are being presented with a method of bullying that they could easily replicate. Kids of a certain age are horrible enough to each other, without being handed instruction videos in cartoon form on how to harass people with food allergies, and this kind of bullying can, and has, caused people to die.

[lyonhibs]

All the best kids cartoons that I remember loving are about 1 party effectively trying to kill/eat the other.

What a load of pish. Are you telling me that my ACME cannon and snare duo pack is somehow unsuitable for kids? :confused:

[snooky]

Jeez, some touchy dude spits a dummy out and the rest of the world has to change just to suit their little hang ups.
Life isn't fair. We learned that in doses as we grew up. God knows how the kids of today will handle the real world when they're adults.

[Pete]

All the best kids cartoons that I remember loving are about 1 party effectively trying to kill/eat the other.

What a load of pish. Are you telling me that my ACME cannon and snare duo pack is somehow unsuitable for kids? :confused:

I think the only one of them I’d describe as maybe unsuitable nowadays is Pepe le pew.

What better way to teach kids that no sometimes means yes?