Was it just me who found the slogans on two men's t-shirts so inappropriate?
The two men now facing me were clearly friends, travelling together, chatting away as they waited their turn in the security line. They were, at a guess, in their mid to late thirties. They were both wearing what looked like brand-new T-shirts; the lattice of recently unfolded lines still visible.
The taller one's T-shirt was dark blue with white lettering. It said: 'Begging For A Pegging.' His friend's T-shirt was black, and said: 'Please Be 18.'
The queue shuffled along. The two men reached the machines, and put their bags into the grubby grey trays. Nobody made any comment on the clearly-visible provocative sexual wording on their T-shirts. I watched as they retrieved their bags and walked off into the duty free area, one slapping the other on the back. It was noon.
READ MORE
As I put my own bag in a tray, I found many questions going through my head. Why were they wearing these T-shirts in the first place? Were they joining up with a stag party somewhere else? What kind of T-shirts might the other people in the party be wearing? Was it just me who found the casually displayed slogans so inappropriate for the public space of an airport terminal? I have zero interest in seeing adults' personal sexual preferences literally spelt out for all to see; like a think bubble over their head.
The airport was also full of children, many of them of an age well able to read. I wondered if some parents that morning had had to deal with questions from their children about 'What is pegging?' and 'What does 'please-be-18′ mean?'
The two men had vanished from sight by the time I got through security – otherwise, curiosity would have had me going after them to ask them these questions face to face. I was never going to see them again, so had nothing to lose. But they were gone.
I am fairly confident, however, that if I had caught up with them and asked them why they were wearing these shirts, they would have said it was a joke, or for a laugh; that it wasn't serious; and also, that it was none of my business what they wore.
I wondered did the man wearing the 'Please Be 18' T-shirt think he was to be congratulated for hypothetically checking in on a hypothetical teenager's age, given the age of consent for sex in Britain is 16, and 17 in Ireland. 'I'm not Humbert Humbert', his T-shirt might as well have read. The subtext being: 'I'm not a creepy older man looking to have underage sex with someone decades younger. Yes, the T-shirt says I'm all about looking to have sex with someone young, but nothing illegal for me. I'll even wear the T-shirt to conveniently ask the question for me.'
[
The welcome I received from Jennifer Johnston is something I will never forget
Opens in new window
]
I doubt very much anyone wearing a T-shirt with a racist or homophobic slogan would have moved as easily through security as these two did. Though, maybe I'm mistaken. It's difficult to know what slogans are acceptable or inappropriate to wear in public these days; to identify where the boundaries lie in how we present ourselves between private and public spaces.
Whatever about at an airport terminal, I don't believe the wearing of either of these T-shirts would go down unchallenged in a work place. I cannot imagine such shirts being worn at a company conference, to meet a client or, as in my own profession, while interviewing a member of the public.
A T-shirt with a slogan is a very individual public billboard, reflecting as it does the interests or values of the person who has chosen to wear it. The first time I became aware of T-shirts gaining media traction for their slogans was in the early 1980s, with British designer Katherine Hamnett's famous 1983 T-shirt that declared 'Choose Life'.
A phrase later appropriated by the anti-abortion lobbyists in the US, Hamnett's interpretation was, as she explained, inspired by Buddhism and intended to be an anti-war comment. A political activist, Hamnett went on to design many T-shirts with far more overtly political slogans.
Today, anyone with access to the internet can design their own customised T-shirt. You see them at family gatherings, with personalised with names for sporting events, hen parties, or for any social occasion you can think of, be it campaigning or partying. You might even have one yourself.
The two T-shirts these two men were wearing at Bristol Airport were not customised. When I looked online later, I discovered that both T-shirts with these particular slogans were being offered for sale on several different websites, including commercial behemoths Amazon and Temu. They come in all sizes and were variously described as 'funny lad T-shirt'; 'novelty present'; 'sarcastic'; 'hilarious'; and 'witty'.
I personally did not find the messages on these T-shirts hilarious, or witty, or sarcastic. Does that make me into the automatic trope of someone who can't take a joke, not just by the people who wear them, but the manufacturers who make them?
All things considered, it's likely if I had caught up with those two men at the airport, they would have instructed me to lighten up. It's possible, of course, that I'm simply a grumpy old woman. Maybe I'll put that on a t-shirt.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
10 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Caribbean LGBTQ+ activists celebrate as court strikes down colonial-era laws
Activists have hailed a historic judgment striking down colonial-era laws that criminalised gay sex in St Lucia as a step forward for LGBTQ+ rights in the Caribbean country. This week the Eastern Caribbean supreme court found that the island's so-called buggery and gross indecency laws, which criminalised consensual anal sex, were unconstitutional. In a joint statement to the Guardian, a group of activists who were the claimants in the case described the judgment as 'deeply personal' but added that there was 'still work to be done'. We know not everyone will agree with the ruling – and that's OK. We're not asking anyone to change their beliefs. What we are asking for is fairness. "These laws were outdated and violated the basic human rights of LGBTQ+ people. Striking them down is just the beginning of creating a safer, more inclusive Saint Lucia for all of us,' the statement said. Speaking to reporters at a press conference after the judgment, attorney Veronica Cenac, who worked on the case, said it was important to remember the origin of the laws. 'Many persons believe that [they are] a part of our cultural identity and that those persons who are asking for their repeal are promoting a western, global north agenda – which is clearly not the case considering that these laws were imposed on us during colonial times,' she said. In St Lucia, the law penalised gay sex with up to 10 years in prison. While the government did not enforce the law, activists and legal experts say it remained a threat to the island's LGBTQ+ community. 'The mere existence of this provision is itself a violation of human rights and underpins further acts of discrimination,' according to Human Dignity Trust, a UK-based legal organisation that helped work on the case. In 2019, the Eastern Caribbean Alliance for Diversity and Equality began filing legal challenges against such laws in Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Grenada, St Kitts and Nevis, and St Lucia. In 2022, courts in Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda, and St Kitts and Nevis struck down those laws. Last year, a court in Dominica did the same. Describing how hearing the monumental judgment left them 'breathless', Kenita Placide, the Alliance's executive director, said: 'It is not often that we, as activists, get to see the results of our hard work.' But, they warned that, while the outcome was a 'stride in the right direction', LGBTQ+ people in St Lucia needed to remain on guard. Several gay men have been brutally murdered in the country over the years, and Placide warned that the judgment did not mean 'that all of a sudden we can do the gay parade without thinking about safety'. 'Right now, there's a little bit of a tension in country. Because almost every two males that walk around are being watched with some kind of scrutiny that they may be engaging. And people are ready to put up phones like they need to be the first to capture,' Placide said. Changing the law was 'half the battle',Placide said, adding that the other half was 'changing hearts and minds where we can actually coexist in the community without being killed' because of sexual orientation. Téa Braun, the chief executive of the Human Dignity Trust, said: 'This is a significant victory for the Caribbean's LGBT community and now leaves just five remaining jurisdictions in the western hemisphere that continue to criminalise consensual same-sex intimacy.' The judgment, Cenac said, could have 'persuasive value' in the remaining countries: Jamaica, Grenada, Guyana, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. Earlier this year, the Trinidad and Tobago supreme court overturned a 2018 high court judgment to remove its 'buggery' laws. Campaigners have expressed concern about the country's case, which will go before the privy council in London, the final court of appeal for UK overseas territories and some Commonwealth countries. One of the issues, they say, is a 'savings clause', a legal technicality created to protect colonial laws. Trinidad and Tobago-based Sharon Mottley, regional programme manager for the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association of North America and the Caribbean, said the ruling brought 'renewed hope and momentum' to the region. 'Here in Trinidad and Tobago, in spite of the reversal this year, the gay community came out in their numbers and we held our Pride Parade on July 20th through the streets of Port of Spain and it was really to send a powerful message that we're here and we're not going anywhere. We refuse to be criminalised and our visibilities, our pride, our resistance and our demand for full recognition will continue,' Mottley said. - The Guardian
Sunday World
13 hours ago
- Sunday World
Man (29) rammed his BMW into bus several times during ‘appalling incident' on motorway
Kabir Alli, Claddagh Park, Tom Bellew Avenue, Dundalk, was sentenced in the district court to three months' imprisonment and disqualified for two years for dangerous driving at Dromad, Co. Louth. A 29-year-old man who drove a BMW car into a minibus several times on the M1 has been spared jail and instead ordered to complete community service following an appeal. Kabir Alli, Claddagh Park, Tom Bellew Avenue, Dundalk, was sentenced in the district court to three months' imprisonment and disqualified for two years for dangerous driving at Dromad, Co. Louth. He was also fined €200 and disqualified for six years for refusing to provide a sample at Dundalk Garda Station. Judge Dara Hayes said that what occurred on February 5, 2022, was an 'appalling incident of driving'. While Mr Alli had mental health difficulties that didn't entitle him to place others in significant harm. Barrister Ronan O'Carroll, instructed by solicitor Fiona D'Arcy, said it was a traumatic experience for the woman who was behind the wheel of the minibus. Stock image News in 90 Seconds, Friday August 1 A probation report stated that the appellant had not much insight into his wrongdoing. This happened during a period of psychosis. Mr Alli, a carer, was maintaining his medication now. He accepted that his behaviour on the night was indefensible and can never be repeated. Judge Hayes remarked that although the appellant was assessed as suitable for community service, his lack of insight in the probation officer's opinion was of some concern. This was an 'appalling incident of driving' at Junction 20 of the M1 at the Carrickdale Hotel exit. Mr Alli was in a UK-registered car. There was no explanation for this as he has been living in Ireland since childhood, the judge said. He crashed a number of times into a mini bus, causing significant damage to this vehicle including the driver's seat such was the force of the collision. He was arrested 1km away having walked southbound on the hard shoulder. Judge Hayes said that the female driver of the minibus was placed in fear. She was travelling southbound minding her own business when 'struck with considerable force'. She had driven to the Ballymascanlon roundabout and onto the Carlingford Road where she sought assistance. She no longer drove at night as a result of what happened. It was 'appalling driving' by the other man who has previous convictions including for drink driving. He had not come to garda attention since. Judge Hayes varied the district court order, increasing the three-month sentence to six months, 150 hours community service in lieu to be completed within 12 months. The two-year disqualification for dangerous driving was increased to six years. The six-year disqualification on the refusal charge remains and the judge also imposed a six-month sentence, suspended in its entirety for 12 months. A stay was put on the start of the disqualifications to August 29 next. Legal aid was granted. Funded by the Courts Reporting Scheme
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
Man (76) arrested after children ‘poisoned' at UK summer camp
A 76-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of administering poison after eight children at a summer camp were taken to hospital. Police and ambulance crews were deployed to the rural camp in Stathern, Leicestershire, after a report that a number of children had said they were unwell. The initial call was made on Sunday by a 'third party', Leicestershire police said, but emergency services were deployed the next day. A triage centre was set up at the nearby Plungar village hall to assess the children who were at the camp. Eight children were then taken to hospital as a precaution, with all of them subsequently discharged. Police said a man (76) had been arrested at the camp on suspicion of administering poison or a noxious thing with intent to injure, aggrieve or annoy. The man remains in custody. A police spokesperson said the force had referred itself to the watchdog, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), 'due to the circumstances of the initial police response'. The investigation is being led by an East Midlands major incident team. DI Neil Holden, the senior investigating officer, said it was a 'complex and sensitive' case. He said: 'We understand the concern this incident will have caused to parents, guardians and the surrounding community. We are in contact with the parents and guardians of all children concerned. Please be reassured that we have several dedicated resources deployed and are working with partner agencies, including children's services, to ensure full safeguarding is provided to the children involved. 'We also remain at the scene to carry out inquiries into the circumstances of what has happened and to continue to provide advice and support in the area. 'This is a complex and sensitive investigation and we will continue to provide updates to both parents and guardians and the public as and when we can.' The force said both detectives and uniformed officers from the Melton and Rutland neighbourhood policing area were still in Stathern carrying out further inquiries and to establish the circumstances of the incident. They were also 'providing reassurance to families affected as well as the local community'. - The Guardian
