According to reports in today's paper, there's been a surge in public concern about global warming.
My only concern is that it's not happening fast enough: we're approaching the middle of May and the weather is really nippy.
What we need is a huge army of people working 24/7/365 chopping down rainforests.
Bollocks to the future, I'm cold now.
I fear I may be the least PC person on here at times and I have no time for knee jerk crowd pulling sentiment either.But lets have it right there is no f**king way that this dickhead didn't know that he was putting a monkey up and how it would be viewed.
As I have said in the real world people are laid off in the back of vans by gang masters for asking other wretches in the mini bus if they think that there should be breaks on a job.
Baker had a job on the beeb and he f**ked up, Why he did is beyond me? But to suggest he didn't know that it was a sacking match is ludicrous.
Its no good saying 'Oooh agendas, ooh the liberals and the left , oooh middle white men are targets. If a mixed race couple in your road had a kid and you posted a picture of two people with a monkey through their letter box, you're a racist simple .
Well said, Teddy.
Quote: chipolata @ 11th May 2019, 10:31 AMI do like that sometimes dipping into threads on the BCG nowadays is like wandering around in a scene from Downfall, in which ageing right wingers try to come to terms with the fact that the world they know is dead or dying. That's not a dig, it's actually quite poignant at times.
You know what, I believe him too. I've haven't listened to him for a long time (football's of no interest to me) but he's a very talented broadcaster. That's kind of irrelevant. The point is big companies and corporations are hyper-protective of their brand and will get shot of people at the drop of a hat if they feel they damage that brand. Ironically, that's more to do with hard headed commercialism and a desire not to alienate a section of your customer base than some politically-correct dystopia ruled by a jackbooted liberal metropolitan elite whose thought police take out and shoot anybody in the back of the head who doesn't think like they do.
Yes but the common theme here is surely the distribution of money. Companies are more overt about it. Their image is linked to sales as you outline. In contrast, the excessively politically correct are just more deceptive about it.
Apart from a handful of people from minority groups, most of which tend to be large these days anyway, who are not well off and look to the law for compensation for what they see as offensiveness (much as some of the poor also look to the law for compensation when they trip over a paving stone and get a slight scratch), the vast majority of poor black people, poor gay people, poor disabled people etc remain poor (just as most white working class people remain poor) while their equivalents in media, politics etc are now very high earners.
It is only the latter who the liberal whites have let in really to their world so that all in that world - white, black and other - can reinforce the maintaining and building of their personal wealth.
An end to excessive political correctness (moderate political correctness is fine) combined with a true mild redistribution of wealth (I'm not in favour of massive redistribution) would lead to far more practical gains for people in minorities as well as poor white people because most people in minorities are not well off and are not compensation seekers.
Tbh, in this light I find it difficult to identify as an aging right winger as for most of my life I identified as a Social Democrat. I was never liberal as it is defined today although I had both mild liberal and small c conservative social leanings based on a balance of personal fairness to everyone and responsibilities needing to accompany rights.
But I had to vote Liberal for years because after the 1980s there was no effective SDP so economically the Libs seemed the closest to Social Democracy. (Ironically Charles Kennedy - not always right especially on EU but a good guy and I miss him - might just about have been a Social Democrat - bloody Blair never was : he was like bloody Cameron and bloody Clegg a modern liberal).
A significant part of me thought that I was even going to buck the trend and become more left wing rather than right wing with age just as I expected to be a sort of latter day John Peel re music, always able to enjoy modern music output.
Now I am a million miles away from it all because of how mainstream politics has become and indeed how crass music has become, neither of which I could have predicted. I am gobsmacked and outraged daily by what I hear and I don't like it. I genuinely feel as if I have been forced against my will into a more right wing position.
So, yes, I have been left by the liberal elites in the so-called modern mainstream feeling raped by them.
Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 11th May 2019, 10:56 AMIf a mixed race couple in your road had a kid and you posted a picture of two people with a monkey through their letter box, you're a racist simple .
Similarly, if Johnny Speight had written an Alf-Garnet-type rant on a piece of paper and pushed it through a black person's letterbox, it would have been racist.
Fortunately, however, neither Johnny Speight nor Danny Baker has ever (as far as I know) pushed any racist literature through anybody's letterbox.
What they have done is to publish/broadcast material that offended huge numbers of people who considered it racist while thoroughly entertaining huge numbers of others who either didn't consider it racist or couldn't give a damn whether it was racist or whether it wasn't.
It's comedy, and sometimes comedy is controversial.
We all know about comedy but this wasn't comedy though was it.
Its the same as the nudge and the wink that apparently do no harm.
One of my best mates has lived his life hiding his relationship with the man he loves and to this day he refers to him as 'My Little Mate' He does it because he like me is from the Alf Garnett / Love they Neighbour Bernard Manning generation who moved from one soft target to another and set the bar for the 'Bloke in the pub' who thinks the Jeremy Clarkson is the only person who gets them. Thats who he still worries about because he was never a good fighter . Well if the IRA shot Clarkson dead for hitting one of his crew for being Irish , it may be over the top but they'd be doing us all a favour.
As for the poor Millwall fan Baker who is oblivious to potential racist remarks all he had to understand is that he was employed 'Front of House' by an international organisation . so if he is sat talking like Hitler on his breaks then he can hardly be surprised when security launch him onto the kerb now can he ?
Quote: Rood Eye @ 11th May 2019, 11:43 AMSimilarly, if Johnny Speight had written an Alf-Garnet-type rant on a piece of paper and pushed it through a black person's letterbox, it would have been racist.
Fortunately, however, neither Johnny Speight nor Danny Baker has ever (as far as I know) pushed any racist literature through anybody's letterbox.
What they have done is to publish/broadcast material that offended huge numbers of people who considered it racist while thoroughly entertaining huge numbers of others who either didn't consider it racist or couldn't give a damn whether it was racist or whether it wasn't.
It's comedy, and sometimes comedy is controversial.
Yes, I do agree.
But there is also a yellow line syndrome. Put the yellow lines on one street and there is controversially more "traffic" on an adjoining street. Rape jokes have proliferated as race etc jokes have been removed. Jordan's child was attacked, I think horribly, by comedians. These are areas which at the very least need finesse which is a skill most people don't possess.
Otherwise, they end up sounding callous in a way that was never associated with "Paleface" references on Love Thy Neighbour (which hasn't incidentally gone away as the modern equivalent, nastier, is "Snowflake") or "Sambo" or Inman doing "I'm Free" or Larry Grayson or La Rue. There was genuine warmth for all of these characters and real people or else they would never have been on the box. And it goes way, way, back. I loved my gollies from the jam company. Tbh I still have them because I am not going to have anyone telling me that I hated them when the opposite was true. Music hall had many wonderful cross-dressers who were not ridiculed. The working classes loved them and sang along with them.
Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 11th May 2019, 12:07 PMWe all know about comedy but this wasn't comedy though was it.
Its the same as the nudge and the wink that apparently do no harm.
One of my best mates has lived his life hiding his relationship with the man he loves and to this day he refers to him as 'My Little Mate' He does it because he like me is from the Alf Garnett / Love they Neighbour Bernard Manning generation who moved from one soft target to another and set the bar for the 'Bloke in the pub' who thinks the Jeremy Clarkson is the only person who gets them. Thats who he still worries about because he was never a good fighter . Well if the IRA shot Clarkson dead for hitting one of his crew for being Irish , it may be over the top but they'd be doing us all a favour.
As for the poor Millwall fan Baker who is oblivious to potential racist remarks all he had to understand is that he was employed 'Front of House' by an international organisation . so if he is sat talking like Hitler on his breaks then he can hardly be surprised when security launch him onto the kerb now can he ?
I have got far too much to say today for which my sincere apologies. I feel embarrassed by the amount of words but they are prompted by such interesting posts from other folks. I am genuinely sorry to hear of the difficulties of your friend who is a victim of history. However, there is such a thing as post-modernism. Tommy Robinson's ex gay Irish pal, very young, very bright, quite impressive and a complete twat in equal measure, certainly worthy at least of listening to in my humble opinion - I forget his name now but I have mentioned it before and he is a part of the new right wing world - argues that Pride when it gets to open debauchery, nudity and f**k yous on the streets is a bit of a dinosaur and counter-productive.
What I think he would argue is that the whole concept of coming out which is adored by liberal middle class straight men and women is a heterosexual construct at root in that it is a reaction to oppressive heterosexual law of decades ago. Gay rights which he regards as having been sufficiently delivered and more so should by now have normalised same sex relationships so that they are enjoyed by those who enjoy them privately (as is the case with most heterosexual relationships) and even an attitude of "what the hell does this sex life have to do with the wider population?" ((as is the case with most heterosexual relationships). In other words, what your friend feels is closeted is actually normally private.
In other words, that his life could and probably would be far easier if he could get that idea into his head. That will be the way for younger people. They will say as much or as little as they choose to do without the weight of history or any right-on straights getting off on being seen to be cool and effectively maintaining an old agenda, not without a sense of power.
It is fascinating, isn't it, that while most O'Briens believe that they have no right to have an opinion on abortion on the grounds that they aren't women they do have a view regularly expressed on gay issues even though they are not gay. That would be the non-physical homosexuality in them. I think what most Joe Soaps who may warmly call a bloke a poof on a regular basis and have no issues with that bloke or an agenda could recognise is that the OB line isn't is any way passive in its male to male inclination. Rather it may well be linked to their sense of power in professional role and financial clout. That is, they divert their inclinations away from physicality to mind f**k what they believe are straight working class oafs. .
Somebody has said of Danny Baker and his notorious tweet that "He's either a fool or he's racist, and he's not a fool."
Skilful rhetoric for sure but my own take on the situation is that he's either a fool or he's racist, and he's not racist.
Danny is almost 62 years old and is clearly one of the most sociable chaps ever to walk the earth: he's a motormouth by any standards. Isn't it surprising, therefore, that nobody has stepped forward to tell us of one single instance of racist language, racist behaviour or even a suggestion of a racist attitude on Danny's part during the last six decades?
In considering that question, let us also consider that when Danny was a young adult, racism was for several years very much the "in" thing among comedians and among the vast majority of blokes drinking in every pub in the land. With newspapers waving wads of cash, surely somebody would now come forward with a story about "Danny's racist past" if anybody had such a story to tell?
I think most of us would accept that comedians and comedy writers sometimes get the devil in them and do and/or say something absolutely outrageous simply because they cannot resist doing so.
God alone knows exactly why Danny posted that tweet, because I'm very sure that, in the cold light of day, Danny himself doesn't know for sure why did it.
I think his epitaph might well be "It seemed like a good idea at the time."
Quote: Rood Eye @ 11th May 2019, 12:58 PMSomebody has said of Danny Baker and his notorious tweet that "He's either a fool or he's racist, and he's not a fool."
Skilful rhetoric for sure but my own take on the situation is that he's either a fool or he's racist, and he's not racist.
Danny is almost 62 years old and is clearly one of the most sociable chaps ever to walk the earth: he's a motormouth by any standards. Isn't it surprising, therefore, that nobody has stepped forward to tell us of one single instance of racist language, racist behaviour or even a suggestion of a racist attitude on Danny's part during the last six decades?
In considering that question, let us also consider that when Danny was a young adult, racism was for several years very much the "in" thing among comedians and among the vast majority of blokes drinking in every pub in the land. With newspapers waving wads of cash, surely somebody would now come forward with a story about "Danny's racist past" if anybody had such a story to tell?
I think most of us would accept that comedians and comedy writers sometimes get the devil in them and do and/or say something absolutely outrageous simply because they cannot resist doing so.
God alone knows exactly why Danny posted that tweet, because I'm very sure that, in the cold light of day, Danny himself doesn't know for sure why did it.
I think his epitaph might well be "It seemed like a good idea at the time."
Yes indeed.
I will post this as I have located it again and I hope that it is permissible because I found it a bit of an eye opener:
Caolan Robertson:
"I wouldn't even rape you".
Part 1 of 2
Have we discussed this yet? Dare we? If we do, can we do it in a way which please, please, please respects the forum and doesn't get anyone into difficulty. I shall set out my stall now.
1. I don't like rape jokes. I find them immature, socially demeaning, and an awful turn of events in politics..
2. I don't think it is right that any MP should feel threatened or frightened.
3. I think when MPs decide that democracy is a play thing (or something to muck the public around with at enormous cost), they risk taking themselves into an entirely different sphere which isn't helpful to them or to us all.
4. Going purely on the basis of tittle-tattle about the reduced number of midwives in any area so that in fact checking the alarmism is proven false or coming up with not easily proven stories about homeless people being moved out of Travelodge for Crufts is additionally questionable.
5. Hip-hop with its constant references to hos and similar gets off scot free and it should not do so why does it?. Why also does Jimmy Carr get away with it? Is it only because he has been a tax dodger and quite a lot of people like that?
6. There is something absolutely tragic about a man with a hipster beard and covered in tatts standing on the stage at a UKIP convention next to one who is doubling down on what he previously said by using the word "bitch" seemingly wetting his panty-hose. It almost puts Rees-Mogg in a wonderful light - and must surely redefine the phrase "silly girl".
7. The debate in Taunton shopping centre between the self-styled Sargon of Akkad and a South African white woman in sunglasses shows at least he has no feeling of needing to be anonymous and his surprising calmness in talk is impressive.
8. . On the minus side, he is the flip side of the coin which has O'Brien on the other surface. This is to say they are so clever-clever with words that it could almost give a bad name to coolness in politics. It is so icy and overly-calculated.
9. The so-called joke doesn't seem to make much sense which is in comedy one of the biggest sins.
10. Personally, I have never been totally convinced that any MP has been murdered since Airey Neave and to be so convinced I would need to see considerably more evidence. Oxfam has been a front for many things including child abuse. There is no reason to believe that some of its employees were not, in effect, linked to the Secret Services.
Part 2 of 2
This is about the so-called joke itself. Obviously discussion is trickier without ending up totally in the mire. I can only do my best which, as ever, is based on limited ability. The word that stands out to me apart from "rape" is "even". "Even" against what because "even" isn't by definition linguistically a stand alone? Various forces come into play here. One is that he just wants to get even with feminism. He doesn't necessarily want it to be heard in that way or perhaps he does. I don't know. Critics might just want to bias it so that it is set against murder which they will probably do as the mainstream is without shame even on logic which would determine that murder is not the natural reference point for being even worse.
So in the juxtaposition it logically has to be set against something milder. Having thought about this for a long. time, I have decided that the contrast has to be rationally with love. Certainly I couldn't love you or by inference make love to you. I don't love you because I find you unlovable. Consequently, there is no way that there would be any forcing of self onto you. Something along these lines. I do think it is clumsy as well as deliberately offensive. I'm totally against the double down. Clearly there are gender power issues involved on all sides. I believe it was partially rallying for calls for a Men's Day where abuses of men would be highlighted which the woman in question had arguably pooh-poohed.
So what perhaps we have here is a deliberate denting of feminist ego by a male for whom feminism may be too much of an issue in the modern age for general comfort. Certainly he doesn't appear muscular although cerebrally he has the capabilities to be so but that is neither here nor there. The more saddening aspect is that it all comes across as so infantile, ironically given the adult nature of it all, and I don't think it is only him who is guilty of it. Certain prompts do come from the other side. The notion which has been put forward in the media that he was contemplating raping is a slur. And the argument on World at One from a traditional UKIP bloke that it was actually a joke about not raping rather than raping may be true in the actuality but it is stretching credibility toward the ludicrous. It does none of them any good.
So why didn't Sargon of Akkad just simply say "I don't like what I regard as your aggressive demeanour and find you are so unlovely as to be unloveable"? That would surely have hit home more, not least because it couldn't easily have been placed in a feminist counter-attack and there may have been emotionally painful crying into sleep for the next fortnight, even if it lacked a try at humour? Or is his true ambition to be a clown, now that genuine clowns do now win elections?
(I hope I have got this suitably acceptable - I am well meaning and what the words don't do is display that there is a huge slice of naivety about me, genuine, almost child like, probably with autistic leanings - I have tried to as best as I can) 
Quote: A Horseradish @ 11th May 2019, 3:03 PM"I wouldn't even rape you".
Have we discussed this yet? Dare we?
No, we haven't discussed it yet and no, I don't think we dare.
I think BCG members will fall broadly into two distinct camps on the issue: (i) those who think the tweeter of the remark should be put to death along with everybody in the world who doesn't think he should be put to death and (ii) those who would rather keep quiet than incur the wrath of the other camp.
Throughout history, in every country and culture in the world, there have been things which, if said to another person, were highly likely to cause very considerable offence.
The above remark has, I imagine, been offensive to women since time immemorial but never has its potential to offend being greater than it is in the current day and age.
The tweeter clearly wanted to create considerable offence and thus chose his words very well.
I think you're giving this Tweeter way too much depth
Because I know you to a degree Rood and I understand your stance on it as you analyze it and break it down but even then the ice is beyond thin and I know you know that.
But I don't think his rape tweets are multi layered or incise with a design to get a greater airing. I think what you see its whats there and that these are the words of some horrible twat who demeans women and when he's not on their cases he will have a minority or a religion or a sexuality or disablement to bounce off till someone sparks him out.
And the reason I say this is simple , if you can not sense the current vibe around vicious tweets especially to elected officials that contain reference to rape which have been taboo for at least 30 years then you don't exactly have your finger on the pulse for public office.
In fact the only pulse this dickhead has got will be throbbing one in his forehead as he reads the Daily Mail and all its dog whistle stories from the people who told us that Mr Hitler was 'One of our own' .
Quote: A Horseradish @ 11th May 2019, 3:03 PM"I wouldn't even rape you"........Why also does Jimmy Carr get away with it?
Horse on the rape joke thing, I've had traumatic times and joke about those traumatic times are healing. So long as they are empathetic. I love jokes about dyslexia, but not insults about it. I find Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr therapy. If you can laugh at something it becomes less scary.
If you've not experienced traumatic times, then I can see how jokes relating to that wouldn't float your boat. But Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr are two of our most popular comedians, you can't deny that. That said, you need to be top of your game to get away with jokes of that ilk, and there are a lot of tasteless, derogatory ones floating about. I don't like those. We're all different Horse, I fully understand why you don't like those and you're lucky. My favourite Frankie Boyle joke: "We couldn't afford a baby sitter, so we just greased up the bath and left him in there." it's funny because it's kind of true (hopefully not in your world).