nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

TWITTERATI OFFENDED - So ban those cute cowboy baby pyjamas, you fcuking Nazi lovers.

Lapin

Clothing retailer Zara has been forced to withdraw a cute childs pyjama top from their Cowboy Baby Range because a few people have likened it to the uniform worn by inmates in Nazi concentration camps.

The top which features horizontal stripes and a sewn-on yellow star emblazoned with the word SHERIFF has been pulled from all outlets and internet sales by Zara. Some, (with overactive imaginations) have likened the sheriff badge emblem to the Jewish Star of David.

The top was clearly not designed to resemble the holocaust uniforms in any way. They had vertical stripes.

Is it right that a few people who claim to be offended by something can have so much influence over the purchasing choices of rest of us and deny us our right to buy pyjamas for our little children?

http://rt.com/news/183184-zara-holocaust-nazi-pyjamas/

Note ^^^ Not a Daily Mail link !

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

anncoates

The furore is good publicity.

That's what you get when 40 somethings that grew up with Malcolm MacLaren and situationism get into prime retail and business positions.

smash

They should replace them with something cool like a green top with a red armband!

topper75

Or maybe sell both together so the kids can chase each other around the house.
History is fun.

bnt

There's no "political correctness" here at all. A Holocaust survivor isn't really getting offended for the sake of getting offended, the look of the thing can trigger some genuinely unpleasant memories. Maybe it's a good thing that no-one at Zara went through that, or just looked at the pyjamas and thought "hang on a minute?". The Holocaust was a long time ago, but not that long.

Moat_Cailin

bonzodog2 wrote: »

Is somebody going to complain about every stripy clothing item from here on then?

Yeah, it gives Holocaust survivors flash backs.

mad muffin

Anyone thinking this is just a non issue or harmless fun. What would you think of a pj resembling the Black and Tans uniform?

smash

mad muffin wrote: »

Anyone thinking this is just a non issue or harmless fun. What would you think of a pj resembling the Black and Tans uniform?

It wouldn't bother me in the slightest!

EIRE1922

Are they having laugh? It is clearly a 'six pointed "Sherrifs" badge' and not the 'Star of David'!

So are you now telling me people will not be allowed to wear white with 'horizontal' blue stripped clothes, as they might deemed to be offensive to Jews and remind them of the 'vertical' striped uniforms worn by Jews during the Holocaust? The pc brigade and Jewish community need to get real! What a joke!

Sklarker

Your kid won't look like a sheriff unless they have a black waistcoat (how did they think of stripes in the first place?). This is the look to go for:
http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/Sheriff_Not-A-Robot

Mr. CooL ICE

Thread has done nothing but give me halloween costume ideas

[Deleted User]

When did cowboys wear Telnyashka's?

topper75

mad muffin wrote: »

Anyone thinking this is just a non issue or harmless fun. What would you think of a pj resembling the Black and Tans uniform?

The Wind that Shakes the Bunk Beds

Kids'll love 'em Mums!

Skullface McGubbin

The stripes on the Pyjamas are horizontal. The stripes on the concentration camp uniforms were vertical. The reaction to the pyjamas seems to be pretty overzealous.
I suppose those offended by the pyjamas will probably have nightmares after seeing this link :rolleyes:

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Timberrrrrrrr

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But surely it's getting ridiculous now where we are nearly banning stripes because it may offend someone.

AudreyHepburn

Lapin wrote: »

Clothing retailer Zara has been forced to withdraw a cute childs pyjama top from their Cowboy Baby Range because a few people have likened it to the uniform worn by inmates in Nazi concentration camps.

The top which features horizontal stripes and a sewn-on yellow star emblazoned with the word SHERIFF has been pulled from all outlets and internet sales by Zara. Some, (with overactive imaginations) have likened the sheriff badge emblem to the Jewish Star of David.

The top was clearly not designed to resemble the holocaust uniforms in any way. They had vertical stripes.

Is it right that a few people who claim to be offended by something can have so much influence over the purchasing choices of rest of us and deny us our right to buy pyjamas for our little children?

http://rt.com/news/183184-zara-holocaust-nazi-pyjamas/

Note ^^^ Not a Daily Mail link !

Those pjs have blue and white stripes on them and yellow star.....if the people designing them didn't immediately think 'The Boy In The Stripped Pyjamas' on seeing the finished product then they must never have heard of the Holocaust.

Offense might not have been meant but come on.....do you not think that a holocaust survivor on seeing the pajamas might feel upset? Do you not think they might unlock some very unpleasant memories for them?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

This is exactly what I was talking about in the other thread about the "right not to be offended". It doesn't f*cking exist, and anyone who calls for something to be banned or censored because it offends them is in my view a toxic pro-fascist activist.
It really makes me sad that movements like this are gaining so much traction. They're everywhere. Whatever happened to the idea of disagreeing with what I say but defending my right to say it?

Donkey Oaty

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

anyone who calls for something to be banned or censored because it offends them is in my view a toxic pro-fascist activist.

Asking a retailer to withdraw a particular type of pyjamas because it may have connotations other than they intended is hardly an assault on free speech though, is it?

Dave_The_Sheep

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This is exactly what I was talking about in the other thread about the "right not to be offended". It doesn't f*cking exist, and anyone who calls for something to be banned or censored because it offends them is in my view a toxic pro-fascist activist.
It really makes me sad that movements like this are gaining so much traction. They're everywhere. Whatever happened to the idea of disagreeing with what I say but defending my right to say it?

I'm tempted to report your post, for the craic.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

pablomakaveli

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

There is a bracket of people, including the designers and those that approved this pyjama and a good few posters here on this thread, that have clearly been failed by the education system.

Seriously, if you cant see the problem with these pyjamas you should stop and realise that you're an idiot and go read a book or watch something educational, fcuking internet generation gobshytes who have the entire wealth of knowledge of the human race at the fingertips but know fcukall about anything that matters.

and breath................

Or,and bare with me here, people understand history perfectly well and just aren't prone to over-reaction and being offended on behalf of others.

If a concentration camp survivor comes out and says "I find this offensive", well then thats an opinion that matters, some random gob****e on twitter not so much.

But sure go ahead and throw a hissy fit.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Asking a retailer to withdraw a particular type of pyjamas because it may have connotations other than they intended is hardly an assault on free speech though, is it?

I just disagree with the entire concept of asking somebody to withdraw something because of offense, intended or otherwise. It's just my opinion and I might be in a minority there. I genuinely feel like over the last 5 years or so, I've seen or heard of a ridiculous number of campaigns to ban products, songs, tweets, whatever because they carry an "offensive" message, and this strikes me as a very autocratic way to address being offended. Issue a rebuttal, call people out, whatever, but trying to pressure them to withdraw what they said leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Donkey Oaty

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I just disagree with the entire concept of asking somebody to withdraw something because of offense, intended or otherwise.

I see where you're coming from - and I'm against censorship, etc - but there's a paradox here, because freedom of speech surely extends to being able to saying what you think is offensive or tasteless and call for whatever you like. It's a commercial decision by the company at the end of the day, not a legal one.

Paramite Pie

Grayson wrote: »

I read the story this morning and the first thing I thought when I saw them was "concentration camp". They look exactly like a concentration camp uniform. I had to read the story to see that they were supposedly a sheriffs uniform. I thought that everyone would think like me, but after reading the thread, obviously not everyone does.

It might be a sheriffs outfit but it is extremely like a concentration camp outfit.

By exactly you mean 'similar' right??

There was no gold stars on the concentration camp uniform, gold triangles were used to mark Jews inside the camps. The triangles were worn before the camps, but the confusion is understandable.
Horizontal lines are not the exact same as vertical lines.

Here's a pic of the different coloured stars & triangles used on the uniforms for Dachau;

http://www.sosantique.se/images/jutav.jpg

As you can see, they're not the same. However, stripes have nothing to do with cowboys. I would put this in the "Unfortunate Implications" category.

geret

There wasn't this much out rage when they had the swastika handbags in 2007

http:// news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7002765.stm