I didn't even know why the shirt might be offensive, so I looked around the comments. I find a collection of offended people cheering on the ever encroaching police state. Lovely.
I finally get to some comments by other confused people, and of course there's the standard "EDUCATE YOURSELF" refrain. Why not just explain the offense? Right wing people love to explain what they're pissed off about, even though the explanation is usually labelled offensive anyway. Why can't authoritarian lefties do the same? Why must I read their minds or sift through a ton of information to find the needle in a needle stack of things that offend them?
Looking at the actual explanation, it's possible the shirt is referring to the 97 deaths of Liverpool fans in a stadium collapse and stampede years ago, or it might just be a coincidence, since the points tally for the team was also 97. Still "not enough" to win.
More than likely, the guy wearing the shirt saw the coincidence, chuckled to himself at the dark humor and put it on a shirt. Poort taste, maybe, but still comedy. If there hadn't been a dual explanation, it would've been just dark and tasteless, but that's not the case.
Vague laws about offensive content are ridiculously dumb, in any case.
Censoring helps the narrative. When the media does a story titled "Far-Right Patriot Front Group Unfurls Anti-Semitic Banner Over Freeway. Local Residents Outraged." and shows video of the blurred out "slur", followed by interviews with people in town about how they are SHOCKED that "hate has come to our community" - people are meant take a certain message away from that.
If they just told people the banner said "Jewish people should get vaccinated" most reactions would be head scratching or mild chuckles.
On the other side of the coin, when parents groups read pornographic books on the record at school board meetings - the exact books that are in school libraries - it's reported as protestors causing a disturbance. If they actually broadcast the entirety of the books contents to the wider public, school officials getting fired would be the least of their worries.
I didn't even know why the shirt might be offensive, so I looked around the comments. I find a collection of offended people cheering on the ever encroaching police state. Lovely.
I finally get to some comments by other confused people, and of course there's the standard "EDUCATE YOURSELF" refrain. Why not just explain the offense? Right wing people love to explain what they're pissed off about, even though the explanation is usually labelled offensive anyway. Why can't authoritarian lefties do the same? Why must I read their minds or sift through a ton of information to find the needle in a needle stack of things that offend them?
Looking at the actual explanation, it's possible the shirt is referring to the 97 deaths of Liverpool fans in a stadium collapse and stampede years ago, or it might just be a coincidence, since the points tally for the team was also 97. Still "not enough" to win.
More than likely, the guy wearing the shirt saw the coincidence, chuckled to himself at the dark humor and put it on a shirt. Poort taste, maybe, but still comedy. If there hadn't been a dual explanation, it would've been just dark and tasteless, but that's not the case.
Vague laws about offensive content are ridiculously dumb, in any case.
Censoring helps the narrative. When the media does a story titled "Far-Right Patriot Front Group Unfurls Anti-Semitic Banner Over Freeway. Local Residents Outraged." and shows video of the blurred out "slur", followed by interviews with people in town about how they are SHOCKED that "hate has come to our community" - people are meant take a certain message away from that.
If they just told people the banner said "Jewish people should get vaccinated" most reactions would be head scratching or mild chuckles.
On the other side of the coin, when parents groups read pornographic books on the record at school board meetings - the exact books that are in school libraries - it's reported as protestors causing a disturbance. If they actually broadcast the entirety of the books contents to the wider public, school officials getting fired would be the least of their worries.
If you have to "educate yourself" enough about a topic to be offended, it's probably not that offensive.