Can I have a Hindu swastika as my avatar?

[roshan]

Several cultures over the world share/have shared it. Like the Halstat culture(pre-celtic) and good old Indo-European migrative folks known as Aryans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's a sun sign, not a swastika, the Nazis stole the design.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quoted for truth, even jews used it on their buildings before hitler shown up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not too many Jewish people feel like associating with the symbol now, though.

 

As the Nazis assimilated the symbol and are now synonymous with it, I don't think it is a good idea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In most of south, southeast and east asia the swastika retains its hindu/buddhist meaning.

[SteveThaiBinh]

To people in many countries in Asia, this is a symbol that's on all their temples, modern and ancient. Any association with nazism is probably little more than a historical footnote to them, if they're even aware of it at all. It's primarily a symbol of their religion. You might say that banning it here is like British Airways banning that woman from wearing a Christian cross because it might offend non-Christians.

[Jorian Drake]

To people in many countries in Asia, this is a symbol that's on all their temples, modern and ancient.  Any association with nazism is probably little more than a historical footnote to them, if they're even aware of it at all.  It's primarily a symbol of their religion.  You might say that banning it here is like British Airways banning that woman from wearing a Christian cross because it might offend non-Christians.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. nearly the same ith jewis buildings

 

2. exactly

[astr0creep]

I don't get this.

 

This type of cross was never exclusive to the Nazis and it still isn't.

I don't see why we should forbid any type of cross that has similarities with the Nazi swastika just because it may offend a Jewish community.

 

Do we need to remove all Stars of David in order to not offend the Muslims or the Crucifix to not offend the Atheists?

 

 

I say let Roshan post his avatar. It's not Nazi enough to make a fuss imho.

Edited January 5, 2007 by astr0creep

[Rosbjerg]

^ I agree..

[metadigital]

I haven't heard a compelling reason why this, Obsidian's private message forum, should risk offending people just because Roshan wants to exercise his rights free speech. That ain't good enough.

[roshan]

But disallowing the swastika could be construed as discrimination against Hindus and Buddhists (the 3rd and 4th most widely practiced religions)

 

Also, is not offending people a valid goal, considering that almost everything is going to offend someone or the other?

[astr0creep]

I haven't heard a compelling reason why this, Obsidian's private message forum, should risk offending people just because Roshan wants to exercise his rights free speech. That ain't good enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Did a Jewish forumite ask any of the mods to prevent Roshan from posting his Avatar?

 

Also, if Roshan would've called his avatar "a Hindu Cross" or something instead of a "Hindu Swastika" would this thread be 3 pages long?

[Surreptishus]

This thread smacks of attention whoring.

Edited January 5, 2007 by Surreptishus

[Nartwak]

Why, just because roshan opened this trivial and private matter up for public discourse instead of ing moderators like a responsible user?

Edited January 5, 2007 by Nartwak

[kirottu]

This thread smacks of attention whoring.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh no it doesn

[astr0creep]

This thread smacks of attention whoring.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Since I posted a thread for my own birthday I won't comment on this. :D

[213374U]

But disallowing the swastika could be construed as discrimination against Hindus and Buddhists (the 3rd and 4th most widely practiced religions)

 

Also, is not offending people a valid goal, considering that almost everything is going to offend someone or the other?

The OE boards' function isn't to further freedom of speech, bring down old taboos, or make the world a better place overall. You can do that elsewhere, and you'll most likely achieve better results, anyway.

 

 

Did a Jewish forumite ask any of the mods to prevent Roshan from posting his Avatar?

Fio told me that "some members" had "expressed their concern" about me using a very similar avatar, so yeah. Edited January 5, 2007 by 213374U

[astr0creep]

Well then there you go...

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I haven't heard a compelling reason why this, Obsidian's private message forum, should risk offending people just because Roshan wants to exercise his rights free speech. That ain't good enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If offensive freedom of speech is an issue, why even let people post here?

[Nartwak]

Magnanimity.

Edited January 5, 2007 by Nartwak

[roshan]

I haven't heard a compelling reason why this, Obsidian's private message forum, should risk offending people just because Roshan wants to exercise his rights free speech. That ain't good enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Did a Jewish forumite ask any of the mods to prevent Roshan from posting his Avatar?

 

Also, if Roshan would've called his avatar "a Hindu Cross" or something instead of a "Hindu Swastika" would this thread be 3 pages long?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Svastika is the proper Hindu term for the symbol. This Sanskrit word was ripped off by the west to describe the Nazi symbol.

 

Ive read somewhere that the Nazis themselves didnt call their symbol a svastika.

 

EDIT: Just checked Wikipedia, the Nazi symbol was actually called the Hakenkreuz.

Edited January 5, 2007 by roshan

[astr0creep]

Svastika is the proper Hindu term for the symbol. This Sanskrit word was ripped off by the west to describe the Nazi symbol.

 

Ive read somewhere that the Nazis themselves didnt call their symbol a svastika.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That does not surprise me at all and thanks for the info.

 

My point was that "svastika" is a pejorative term, almost equal to Jews as N***** is to African Americans in some ways.

[alanschu]

But disallowing the swastika could be construed as discrimination against Hindus and Buddhists (the 3rd and 4th most widely practiced religions)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Except that he stated straight up that disallowing it would be with respect to the association it has with Nazism.

[astr0creep]

But disallowing the swastika could be construed as discrimination against Hindus and Buddhists (the 3rd and 4th most widely practiced religions)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Except that he stated straight up that disallowing it would be with respect to the association it has with Nazism.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But... it's not the "Nazi Svastika", it's the Hindu one.

[alanschu]

So?

[astr0creep]

So?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hindus didn't burn six million Jews during WW2.

[alanschu]

So?

 

The association is there. Otherwise this thread would never have existed. Roshan himself admits the association to Nazism, as he started this thread.

 

Christians aren't satanic worshippers, yet they've distanced themselves from the pentagram, because of the association it now has with the occult.

[astr0creep]

So?

 

The association is there.  Otherwise this thread would never have existed.  Roshan himself admits the association to Nazism, as he started this thread.

 

Christians aren't satanic worshippers, yet they've distanced themselves from the pentagram, because of the association it now has with the occult.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We are in agreement but association is not the issue.

 

The issue, aside from attention whoring, is the same as the Seatle Christmas tree.

It's about always walking on eggshells so as to not offend a Jewish or any other religious/cultural community.

Edited January 5, 2007 by astr0creep

[Surreptishus]

A Christmas tree is nowhere near as offensive as a swastika... unless you are a druid/hippy or something.