LeeVanTeeth Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 An obnoxious c**t according to a pal of my ex who had to serve some drinks to him, Gazza and co back in the 90s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlipperyP Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Im sure she had ditched all her Corgis. Also the BBC will probably shut down it will be either rolling news or just be somber music. Most countries do this for the royals which I think is quite odd especially the ones who live remote lives from their subjects. At least the Japanese Emperor meets normal folk and sits on the floor despite living in great luxury.Yes, it was rolling royal news on all channels here for about 3 days. Or the screen was just a picture of the king.No music was allowed in public for 1 month. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 18 minutes ago, Skerla said: He deserves sacking just for the fucking hats he wears 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 How stupid do you have to be to be a public figure and tweet something like that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unleash The Nade Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Just now, Dons_1988 said: How stupid do you have to be to be a public figure and tweet something like that? Apparently moron level 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 If it's that easy for the BBC to (deservedly) sack someone, why do they still have so many utter escapees of failed contraception on their books? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 36 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: FTFY. And the answer is so pure of thought that the implication of posting would never enter your mind, according to the lying b*****d. It really is calling card of moron stuff though. Even if you're a hardened racist anyone with any presence of mind would know that his tweet would probably result in almost instant sacking 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Took Limmy long enough: Dara O'Briain doing his bit for "comedians should be allowed to say anything" in the replies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 FTFY. And the answer is so pure of thought that the implication of posting would never enter your mind, according to the lying b*****d. It really is calling card of moron stuff though. Even if you're a hardened racist anyone with any presence of mind would know that his tweet would probably result in almost instant sackingI get that folk think he's a c**t, he's always been a bit like that. But do you pair genuinely think he had racist intent with that tweet? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hampden Diehard Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Then they queue for hours to sign a book of remembrance! Totally bizarre behaviour My ex-wife did exactly that at the local super market who had their own book of condolence. It also shut the morning of the funeral but the tills were back ringing in the afternoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resk Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Wonder if the royal family ever dig out the old book of condolences and have a right old laugh at the pish that the proles were writing. It would be like a pre-facebook facebook. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMusic Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 49 minutes ago, pandarilla said: I get that folk think he's a c**t, he's always been a bit like that. But do you pair genuinely think he had racist intent with that tweet? To tell you the truth, when I saw it I thought he was equating the royal sprog with being a posh performing chimp, which is an accurate description for all of them. I didn't even begin to think of the racist connotations until I'd heard he'd been sacked, and then felt rather stupid for not seeing it. I do actually think from his response that he didn't intend to be racist, but surely he must have known that comparing a royal sprog to any animal, with racist connotations or otherwise, would result in the ultra PC beeb giving him his jotters??? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMusic Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: the daily torrent of obliquely racist content aimed at Meghan Markle And that's just Prince Phillip! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Probably not, no. But as I said in the other thread from the point of view of him losing his job, it is the general way it's perceived rather than his intention that'll be the thing that got him sacked. My most charitable interpretation is he has lived a very pleasant life for the last 25 years and is oblivious to the daily torrent of obliquely racist content aimed at Meghan Markle and thought he'd make some kind of joke about royals in general producing wonky offspring. And I'm really stretching in my charitability there.Perceived by who though? Who looks at this and laughs at this from a racist point of view? I teach history and I fully understand the historic connotations. But this kind of response only entrenches racist attitudes, because it is so ridiculous.Is she subjected to a daily torrent of racist abuse? I genuinely have no idea but why would that have anything to do with this case? Arseholes will do their thing, and need to be dealt with accordingly (which most of the time is just ignore). I don't think there's anything charitable in your interpretation. I think he's making a daft joke about the whole circus of a royal baby being brought out and shown to the world. It's a bit silly and not in any worth the air time it's received. The BBC have given these views increased legitimacy with this idiotic decision. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) Given that half the country were probably mildly curious what colour the baby would be, I doubt somebody running a prime time phone in show would be entirely ignorant of how posting a picture of a chimp would look. He thought it was funny and got it very wrong. You don't have to be innately racist to make a shite joke. Edited May 9, 2019 by welshbairn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeAreElgin Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 People that use the term "PC brigade" are indeed morons 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Given that half the country were probably mildly curious what colour the baby would be, I doubt somebody running a prime time phone in show would be entirely ignorant of how posting a picture of a chimp would look. He thought it was funny and got it very wrong. You don't have to be innately racist to make a shite joke. Half the country were curious about the colour of the baby? Seriously? I'm not entirely up on on the genetics of skin tone but she's very light skinned (to the point where most folk probably wouldn't know she was of mixed heritage the first time they saw her), and the father is very white. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeVanTeeth Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 2 hours ago, pandarilla said: I get that folk think he's a c**t, he's always been a bit like that. But do you pair genuinely think he had racist intent with that tweet? I would guess not. But in the age of more people than ever being easily offended, he should surely have been smart enough to realise the consequences of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMusic Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, LeeVanTeeth said: I would guess not. But in the age of more people than ever being easily offended, he should surely have been smart enough to realise the consequences of it. Indeed, and it nicely veils the real offence that Baby Hewitt is going to live a life in obscene luxury at the expense of ordinary people. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Re: who'll look at and laugh at it from a racist point of view: racists would. Re: torrents of abuse - probably, I've not checked twitter etc. I was more meaning the stream of tabloid headlines that all follow a 'Look at what she's allegedly done! If she was somehow... different... she wouldn't have allegedly done that eh? eh?'. My point in talking about it is for a certain kind of meeja person, they're pretty coccooned from a lot of this and get a bit bent out of shape when wider society, which isn't, reacts poorly to something they've said that crosses into this territory. Hence his 'my mind isn't warped so I didn't see the way this could be interpreted' schtick. Your interpretation works too. Either way, the 'black woman gives birth to ape' interpretation eclipses these more innocent jokes, or certainly has done to a large enough group of people that the BBC has felt it had to act decisively. I don't agree at all that the BBC in taking this action has in some way legitimised the racist interpretation.But the picture wasn't a black woman giving birth to a chimp. It was a chimp in a posh suit, with old-world upper class parents. The BBC didn't show the picture. In my opinion there is nothing offensive about that picture, nothing at all. There is a real historic connection with black people and monkeys but it's certainly not jumping out in that picture. I have always defended political correctness, and generally judge anyone who uses the phrase 'pc gone mad' in a serious way as a numpty. Stewart Lee sums it up perfectly for me when he calls it (and I'm paraphrasing) 'a clumsy set of rules that make our society a bit more kind and a bit less cruel'. For me this decision reeks of clumsy pc management, by folk who have legitimised unreasonable offence. I'd go as far to call anyone who says they are offended by this a complete idiot. I couldn't give a f**k if you're offended - just saying it isn't enough. It means nothing. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.