Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

Ok a different observation - in a room fully of lovelies who only know acting, they were caught out by being exposed to a real person living his real life. Any wet wipe can say ?‘free Palestine?’, what did they expect from this fellah who just said what he saw in his own language.

Back on my usual hobby horse, here as a consequence we have another BBC SNAFU that they then spam the airwaves with news and analysis about - They should cancel BBC4 and have a news channel just about the BBC

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying. How do you compare a statement of support/solidarity (Free Palestine) with an involuntary verbal ‘tic’?

What does ‘who just said what he saw in his own language’ actually mean?

Are you supporting the BBC’s stance or think they’ve ‘ducked up’ again?

Not looking for a fall out. Just genuinely confused.

[Andy_Faber]

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying. How do you compare a statement of support/solidarity (Free Palestine) with an involuntary verbal ‘tic’?

What does ‘who just said what he saw in his own language’ actually mean?

Are you supporting the BBC’s stance or think they’ve ‘ducked up’ again?

Not looking for a fall out. Just genuinely confused.

I'm comparing (actually contrasting)) by comparing a deliberate political act with an involuntary act. I think BBC did the right thing editing one out and not the other but I don't live in the BBC's world of constant scrutiny, I would have expected them to edit both things out for the sake of small p political correctness. My 'issue' is that they've now self-generated probably 24 hours of hand-wringing new headlines, in depth analysis, the usual suspects wheeled out for comment (have we seen Lenny Henry yet?) etc when they could be reporting actual news

His language is Tourettes, I think Sith mentioned dementia being similar and my mum went through that, her language was Dementia, who knew what she'd say from one minute to the next, including swearing, insults, home truths you name it. Back to last night, his attendance was pretty certain so the organisers and broadcasters should have been prepared

Sorry if that doesn't explain

[SithHappens]

Ok a different observation - in a room fully of lovelies who only know acting, they were caught out by being exposed to a real person living his real life. Any wet wipe can say ‘free Palestine’, what did they expect from this fellah who just said what he saw in his own language.

Back on my usual hobby horse, here as a consequence we have another BBC SNAFU that they then spam the airwaves with news and analysis about - They should cancel BBC4 and have a news channel just about the BBC

Imagine if hed have shouted something at Ricky Gervais or Jimmy Carr , they can react quickly, would have likely made a joke out of it without making him feel so **** he felt he had to leave.

[ramAnag]

Imagine if hed have shouted something at Ricky Gervais or Jimmy Carr , they can react quickly, would have likely made a joke out of it without making him feel so **** he felt he had to leave.

I suspect, without being very clearly informed of what was going on that Ricky Gervais and - more particularly - Jimmy Carr would have actually left him feeling a lot worse. I know your points are entirely well intentioned but I do think, on this occasion, you’re maybe over simplifying things.

This may be a naive thing to say - and I didn’t actually watch the programme and don’t know the full circumstances - but couldn't he have been provided with a sort of ‘social chaperone’. I’ve taken very challenging pupils to the theatre and sporting events many times and managing the seating arrangements accordingly is just a gimme.

Andy, I really didn’t mean to touch a raw nerve. Respect the experience you refer to and will leave our debate there.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I suspect, without being very clearly informed of what was going on that Ricky Gervais and - more particularly - Jimmy Carr would have actually left him feeling a lot worse. I know your points are entirely well intentioned but I do think, on this occasion, you’re maybe over simplifying things.

This may be a naive thing to say - and I didn’t actually watch the programme and don’t know the full circumstances - but couldn't he have been provided with a sort of ‘social chaperone’. I’ve taken very challenging pupils to the theatre and sporting events many times and managing the seating arrangements accordingly is just a gimme.

Andy, I really didn’t mean to touch a raw nerve. Respect the experience you refer to and will leave our debate there.

i didnt see it either, just reading here for first time. Two issues her - the "free Palestine" cut, which should have been cut in the same way as if an actor or presenter had made any other political comment evident at any apolitical event - eg also cut an attack on Starmer or a pro Israeli observaion. That oens clear cut IMO. not unlike anyone making a pro brexit comment at the Eurovision Song Contest finals....

On the second point I tend to agree with Sith. Since the outburst was essentially involuntary its hard to blame the perpetrator - whether he should have been invited in view of the fact that this possibility might have been predictible is another thing that the celebrant luvvies should perhaps have thought about. If you invite Tommy Robinson to a curry night you have to expect pushback.

But its all just storms in teacups really, isnt it. And some nice political opportunism by Butler. Probably the BBC were wrong not to edit out the comments, but they genuinely may have missed it as opposed to deliberatley leaving it in to make some sort of point (not sure why they would have done it though).

Not sure how a social chaperone might have stopped the comments though as in my limited knowledge of Tourettes sucg comments are involuntary and cannot be stopped via a friend. I take my dog to the park regularly but that doesnt stop him ****ting - so I take a bag to clean the mess up once its happened.

Still I'm sure the hue and cry will do no harm for cinema revenues which may well be a reason for the whole thing kicking off - although I, who had never heard of the film before - still wont be planning to see it.

[SithHappens]

Im not sure its over simplifying it, what happened could happen in any social setting and likely does.

The Queen took it in her stride when he shouted **** the queen when getting his MBE.

I just don't understand what the role of a chaperone could achieve, you aren't going to stop him shouting out unless you physically restrain him.

Maybe it doesn't happen in normal social settings to these millionaire pampered actors, maybe the restaurants they dine in have a no disability rule, it actually wouldn't surprise me.

The reason I used Gervais and Carr as examples is because I would have expected them to be aware, like everyone was. They are also quick thinking and having seen a fair amount of their material id expect them to handle it with humour and compassion.

I know Carr especially can be brutal but he hes very intelligent and reads the room incredibly well and can be very sensitive.

Gina Yasheres outburst about it is appalling if you get chance to see it, suggests he should have been evicted by security, suggests several times (despite claiming she's not going there) that it was deliberate.

[SithHappens]

Im reminded a bit of an incident when we went out with family members to watch a show. Sat behind us was a family with a young boy, maybe 10/11 ish who clearly had a disability. He was laughing very loud at everything, shouting out. To be honest he was having a great time.

This was clearly annoying members of my family and at the interval they said comeon we are moving.

My wife and me refused, to be honest the lad enjoying himself was great to see and hear. But I felt ashamed they had moved because I feel sure his family would have known why.

Now you could say it was better that then saying something etc. That's something I had forgotten about until now.

As it happens one of my nephews is showing signs he might have tics, I wonder how my family would feel if someone moved or complained if he does go on to develop something similar to John Davidson.

[swaledale]

We'll have to agree to differ, both on your original assertion and your comeback/personal attack above. IMO we just have a different experience to recount. Whatever response you now offer I'm out of this particular subject. If you count that as 'winning' in some way that's up to you,

I don't see it as winning, what a strange view I'm just looking at the facts here. You made two assumptions, 1) That I hadn't been and knew nothign about Great Yarmouth, that was completely wrong. 2) That you'd been there and seen its decline and expressed the view that immigration had impacted on the town and its residents. Though you provided no further details or examples of your "lived experience".

I then presented, the demographic figures, which show clearly that the proportion of immigrants in the town is very small and gave a number of factors which have impacted on the residents, immigration clearly isn't one of them.

I am very aware that some residents of this and other towns (Clacton being an example I'ved used before) have expressed the view that the reason they have issues with housing, jobs, access to GP's, etc. etc. is down to immigration. Unfortunately if immigrants are only a small percentage of the population in an area, that patently cannot be true! Some people might think it is, but that doesn't make it a fact, just somebody's delusion.

Your final response, "Lived experience" makes no sense.
1) You don't explain what this lived experience is
2) Your "Lived Expereince" may be true, but clearly isn't representative of the place.

You might as well say, it always rains in Great Yarmouth, because your lived experience is that every time you have been there is has rained. Yet that would not be true, as the record of rainfall in Great Yarmouth would clearly show.

I get it that you have nothing to back up your claims, or to put it another way, your experience is limited so as to be unrepresentative, though its odd that apparently its quite in order for you just to give some vague opinion, yet constantly challenge me to provide evidence to back up my statements and furthermore challenge me as to my sources.

You may recall that the last time you used your "lived experience" to gleefully try and counter a comment I made (re iphones), you were shown to be wrong.


Its not about winning, its about determining the facts of the matter, but maybe your invested in this post truth world, where what you believe is based on your own prejudices and views irrspective of the reality?

[Andy_Faber]

Im reminded a bit of an incident when we went out with family members to watch a show. Sat behind us was a family with a young boy, maybe 10/11 ish who clearly had a disability. He was laughing very loud at everything, shouting out. To be honest he was having a great time.

This was clearly annoying members of my family and at the interval they said comeon we are moving.

My wife and me refused, to be honest the lad enjoying himself was great to see and hear. But I felt ashamed they had moved because I feel sure his family would have known why.

Now you could say it was better that then saying something etc. That's something I had forgotten about until now.

As it happens one of my nephews is showing signs he might have tics, I wonder how my family would feel if someone moved or complained if he does go on to develop something similar to John Davidson.

That’s a tricky one Sith, but there’s a difference just IMO between moving (to recover the enjoyment one expected from attending) and asking the person himself to move or otherwise complain directly about him. I can see both sides re the former, totally against the latter. There is a third way, which my family are constantly embarrassed about because I do it, and that is to actually engage with the person concerned. Such people no doubt struggle for interaction and my ‘habit’ started when somewhat shamefully my (then) local church congregation used to pretty much ignore a fellah who had ‘problems’. He told me he knew he’d be treated like that in most settings and said (I paraphrase) ‘look on the bright side, at least I can always get a seat!’

[Andy_Faber]

I don't see it as winning, what a strange view I'm just looking at the facts here. You made two assumptions, 1) That I hadn't been and knew nothign about Great Yarmouth, that was completely wrong. 2) That you'd been there and seen its decline and expressed the view that immigration had impacted on the town and its residents. Though you provided no further details or examples of your "lived experience".

I then presented, the demographic figures, which show clearly that the proportion of immigrants in the town is very small and gave a number of factors which have impacted on the residents, immigration clearly isn't one of them.

I am very aware that some residents of this and other towns (Clacton being an example I'ved used before) have expressed the view that the reason they have issues with housing, jobs, access to GP's, etc. etc. is down to immigration. Unfortunately if immigrants are only a small percentage of the population in an area, that patently cannot be true! Some people might think it is, but that doesn't make it a fact, just somebody's delusion.

Your final response, "Lived experience" makes no sense.
1) You don't explain what this lived experience is
2) Your "Lived Expereince" may be true, but clearly isn't representative of the place.

You might as well say, it always rains in Great Yarmouth, because your lived experience is that every time you have been there is has rained. Yet that would not be true, as the record of rainfall in Great Yarmouth would clearly show.

I get it that you have nothing to back up your claims, or to put it another way, your experience is limited so as to be unrepresentative, though its odd that apparently its quite in order for you just to give some vague opinion, yet constantly challenge me to provide evidence to back up my statements and furthermore challenge me as to my sources.

You may recall that the last time you used your "lived experience" to gleefully try and counter a comment I made (re iphones), you were shown to be wrong.


Its not about winning, its about determining the facts of the matter, but maybe your invested in this post truth world, where what you believe is based on your own prejudices and views irrspective of the reality?

I?ve told you I?m not engaging further on this subject and I knew you?d want the last word(s?) but regarding 1) ( your first (1) I stand corrected