|
Not long ago the Mail campaigned for Ross and Brand to be sacked by the BBC for their obscene phonecall to Andrew Sachs. Offensive behaviour, said the Mail and its readers, is not acceptable. Words cause damage.
However, fast forward a few weeks and Carol Thatcher refers to a black tennis player as a 'golliwog' on a BBC (though not on air) and the BBC remove her from that program. Surely, as the Mail and its readers have already put forward their views that offensive behaviour and language is not acceptable, they will be lauding the BBC for its swift action in getting Carol Thatcher off of BBC 1?
Of course they don't, in fact, they don't even think that 'golliwog' is a racist or offensive word.
Racist homophobe Richard Littlejohn naturally blames not the person using the offensive word, but the 'golliwog squad' (must be a term of abuse like 'PC brigade', 'eco-loonies' etc) who are childish for considering 'golliwog' a racist term. Only in the fucked-up world of Littlejohn and his mindless readers does that argument make any a slither of fucking sense. Mad Mel (who I strongly encourage to seek medical help for her mental illness) actually argues that such behaviour from the BBC only further confirms the 'totalitarian universe of the closed BBC mind'; stating that:
If the BBC had intended to convince the public that it had departed altogether from reality and common sense and resided instead in some alternative Stalinist universe, it could hardly have done a better job.
For getting rid of a presenter who called a black person a 'golliwog'? What fucking world do you live in Mel?
Naturally, both Littlejohn and Mad Mel both stress the importance of 'context, asking if we really know in what way the comment was made, as if somehow the word isn't offensive if surrounded by certain other words, or pronounced in some magical way. Strange how they didn't try to contextualise Ross and Brand's phonecall; no, they were too busy rigging nooses and sharpening pitch forks. Anyway, here is what the Mail readers have to say about Littlejohn's argument:
Am I the only one who find the Leftists and the PC Brigade rather amusing?
They scream long and loud about tolerance and inclusiveness, what ever that is meant to be, yet when it comes to things they disagree with the immediately become the most bigoted, intolerant fascist thugs imaginable.
They will openly bully, abuse, insult and exclude anybody who they can conveniently persecute. They are the 21st Century extremists intent only in terrorising the rest of the public to conforming to their vicious, narrow minded dogma.
My only surprise is that they are not demanding that Carol Thatcher be condemned to the frozen wastes of Cheshire to slave in the salt mines. Their hero, Stalin, would not have hesitated for one second. The only question is, Richard, how long will it be before we are all dragged off to share the same fate?
- Jimmy R, Highlands Scotland, 5/2/2009 23:48
Jimmy, where to start with your comment? Firstly, it is not 'leftist' to complain about someone in your company, or in the media spotlight referring to a black person as a 'golliwog', if you do not complain you are either spineless or racist. Secondly, racial abuse is normally something that fascism encourages, along with aggressive nationalism, intolerance of racial abuse is not therefore something that can (in any sane mind) be labelled 'facist'. Thirdly, the tennis player being called a 'golliwog' is the only person here who has been 'bullied', 'abused', 'persecuted' or 'terrorised' (if indeed all of those words are appropriate here). Finally, anyone who can draw any kind of comparison between the BBC sacking a member of the public for being openly racist, and Stalin's communist Russia should really read a book on what Stalin's Russia was actually like (or just read anything other than the Mail full stop; so you might be less inclined to spout such absolute bollocks). Am I the only one to find the constant accusations that the UK is a Nazi or Communist state not-at-all amusing or even vaguely relevant?
It makes you wonder why our grandfathers and fathers put their lives at stake to defend us really.Had they known what a horrible mess just about everything in this place would end up in, they wouldn't have bothered.
- ray king, wood green london, 5/2/2009 21:54
Yes it does. It makes me wonder why they fought so that the Mail could whinge and bitch about every little thing when they actually made sacrifices for the freedoms that we do (and we really are free in this country) enjoy. Like your freedom to post absolute shite whenever you want (although the Mail does not allow many dissenting views on its website). Also, perhaps you should investigate the Mail's support for facism and nazism prior to World War II or Lord Northcliffe and the Mail's involvement in creating the atmosphere for World War I. But I suppose that would involve you actually using your mind, something you are clearly not capable of judging by your cliched post.
I haven't the patience to plow through around 200 other comments of varying degrees of shite. However, what about a post written by someone who has suffered racial abuse, surely Mail readers couldn't pick holes in that?
I am a Black British woman, born in 1968. During the whole of the 70s and 80s 'golliwog' was always used in a derogatory way about black people. It was used in school playgrounds, by racist teachers, racist police officers and storekeepers. All that is what I personally experienced. This is in addition to seeing the word used offensively in TV programmes, magazines and books.
If black children complained to teachers about being called racist names they were told (I was told) that I just had a chip on my shoulder and that we (I) shouldn't be so sensitive!
It seems that the racists want a return to "the good old days" when they could use racist language with impunity.
- Angela Allison, United Kingdom, 6/2/2009 10:25
Oh. Down ratedby at least 43 readers. Why? I'll let you ponder that. |
