Discussion of article from the Mail's columnists and RightMinds contributors
  •  
  •  
  •  
By Lord Brett
Membership Days Posts
#288536
oboogie wrote:
Big Rob wrote:Mind you, she did make shabby remarks about transgender men that was essentially mocking them for what they couldn't control.
But that doesn't make it ok to mock her for something she can't control though does it?
No, it doesn't. If I didn't know how unpleasant she could be I might have found her voice quite cute, but as she's made her career since the eighties having unpleasant, ill-thought out opinions for money I can't help but associate the two.

IMHO you're right, Oboogie - it's about what she says, not how.
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#288537
Given the amount of flack she gets for it I very much doubt she's putting it on any more than my friend Niki (who speaks in a similar way) does.

As for annoying, people speak in different ways, most people understand that and learn to tolerate difference. If some don't that's their problem not hers, why should she change?

To me it's akin to the sidebar of shame criticizing a woman for her appearance - simply a bit of irrelevant nasty bullying.
I expect some people think she looks annoying, should she have plastic surgery to conform to their aesthetics?
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#288539
Lord Brett wrote:
oboogie wrote:
Big Rob wrote:Mind you, she did make shabby remarks about transgender men that was essentially mocking them for what they couldn't control.
But that doesn't make it ok to mock her for something she can't control though does it?
No, it doesn't. If I didn't know how unpleasant she could be I might have found her voice quite cute, but as she's made her career since the eighties having unpleasant, ill-thought out opinions for money I can't help but associate the two.

IMHO you're right, Oboogie - it's about what she says, not how.
Thank you.
We need to be alert to the temptations of double standards.
Elsewhere I have see people doing fat jokes about Eric Pickles. The same people who thought it was outrageous when the Mail press did fat jokes about Prescott.

Julie Burchill speaks quite like the comedian Sarah Silverman (and unlike Burchill, she speaks for a living). Silverman I like, Burchill I don't. Their voices don't enter into it.
Last edited by oboogie on Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By Big Rob
#288540
oboogie wrote:
Big Rob wrote:Mind you, she did make shabby remarks about transgender men that was essentially mocking them for what they couldn't control.
But that doesn't make it ok to mock her for something she can't control though does it?
If I was a transgender male and she mocked me then she hardly has a moral leg to stand on if I was to mock her voice.

Of course if she didn't mock me and I was to bring up her voice then I wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
By torontoboy45
Membership Days
#288552
oboogie wrote:
Big Rob wrote:Mind you, she did make shabby remarks about transgender men that was essentially mocking them for what they couldn't control.
But that doesn't make it ok to mock her for something she can't control though does it?
exactly.

I'm going bald. short of doing the dry weave top sheet thing or a straightforward syrup of fig my choices are non-existent. doesn't stop people from making snarky comments, though.

for my part, I won't knock people - even burchill - for being unlucky enough to own a squeaky voice that they're unable to change. I'm sure that on oboogie's evidence malcolm will be inclined to agree.
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#288553
Big Rob wrote:
oboogie wrote:Two wrongs don't make a right.
Interesting however the killing of German belligerents during WWII was a retaliatory 'wrong' that was 'righted' by the eventual defeat of Nazi Germany.

Therefore I don't think you can hold that standard up as a moral absolute.
You were talking about name calling.
I would argue that war is something of a special case wouldn't you?
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#288559
Oboogie is currently on my ignore list on this board, since I find his tendency to attribute views and opinions to me that I haven't actually expressed, and then to excoriate me on that basis, vexatious and dishonest. I have no wish to engage with him on this board (or any other), so this suits me fine.

However, I do see his comments when someone else quotes them, and I note that he hasn't kicked the habit.

I said
I find Burchill impossible to take seriously at the best of times, but when I hear that ludicrous squeaky high-pitched voice she's just off the scale.
Oboogie, it seems, has chosen to interpret this as me cruelly mocking Burchill for something she cannot control, that is to say, her voice.

Well, yes. Mocking Burchill I certainly am. I say that I find her impossible to take seriously at the best of times. And I make no apology for that - the woman's output is for the most part totally absurd. But Burchill's voice simply compounds my low opinion of Burchill, it is not the source of it, and I mention it merely in passing. I'd still find her absurd, and ripe for mockery, if her voice were otherwise.

So, not for the first time, Oboogie has put forward a wilful misinterpretation of what I said, and chosen to criticise me on that spurious basis.

I have no doubt that on past form, Oboogie would love to argue the toss on this, even having had his misrepresentation pointed out to him. But I know that it's pointless to ask him to withdraw or apologise, as he completely lacks the grace to so.

So he stays firmly on my ignore list, having confirmed the wisdom of my decision to place him there. But I thought that I should point out what I actually said, as opposed to what Oboogie chooses to interpret, to the rest of the board.
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#288566
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:Would it get me ignored by both of you if I said I think you're both right, and that I'd be much happier not to see you at odds?
No. Oboogie is not right. I was not gratuitously criticising Burchill on the sole basis of her voice.
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#288568
I never said that the source of Abernathy's low opinion of Burchill was her voice.
I have not "put forward a wilful misinterpretation" of what he said, as can be seen by anyone who cares to look back through this thread, his words are plain enough and no interpretation is necessary.
Maybe if Abernathy actually read my posts he would be better versed in the facts and wouldn't jump to false conclusions.
Why on earth would I "withdraw or apologise"? I thought Abernathy's remark was nasty and uncalled for and I still do.
 
By oboogie
Membership Days Posts
#288569
Abernathy wrote:
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:Would it get me ignored by both of you if I said I think you're both right, and that I'd be much happier not to see you at odds?
No. Oboogie is not right. I was not gratuitously criticising Burchill on the sole basis of her voice.
And if you actually read my posts you would know that I never said that you were.
By Big Rob
#288572
oboogie wrote: You were talking about name calling.
I would argue that war is something of a special case wouldn't you?
So your position that two wrongs don't make a right is not an absolute, as I said. So you need to expand your point.

Under what conditions does two wrongs make a right hold true and under what conditions does it not hold true?
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
Jeremy Hunt

he has taken to wearing a US style union jack […]

Boris Johnson

When you put it like that. Not sure I’m li[…]

Brexit Fuckwit Thread

He was asked about that on TV this morning, and as[…]

Jeremy Corbyn.

If only Kier had stood for leader in 2015. He[…]