|
|
Post by unclejunior on Mar 13, 2018 7:06:12 GMT
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 13, 2018 7:15:42 GMT
Very good article although utterly shaming that it has to be written at all. Imagine if it was gangs if white men and Asian girls? Imagine the outcry. Look at the mass hysteria around the post Brexit "surge" of racist abuse that the BBC and Guardian indulged in. It's fcuking shameful and it's exactly this attitude that's allowed the rapes to go on for as long as they have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 13, 2018 7:16:02 GMT
Yep definitely the most important part of this story is the BBC reporting...
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 13, 2018 7:17:46 GMT
You do realise you have already posted that right? In the OP....? |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 13, 2018 7:32:55 GMT
Yep definitely the most important part of this story is the BBC reporting... The silence and carpet underbrushing surrounding the whole issue is definitely a huge part if it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 7:44:55 GMT
Yep definitely the most important part of this story is the BBC reporting... The point here is that it's about Asian men who appear to have a propensity for this. That's the point. The BBC is a side issue, although I agree with some on this - it should be disbanded, even if just for this one particular issue. Let's go further and consider what effect this ongoing outrage has had on some of those less-informed who voted out of the EU on what has been seen as 'xenophobic' grounds. This is a colonial problem, not a European one. These come from the old British colonies where our own predecessors raped and pillaged. What goes around comes around as they say. And with May's desire to forge new 'deep and meaningful' relationships with India, the rape centre of the world, don't even for one moment think that this is going to be the end of it. The cultural basis of the UK's changing, and it's about colonialism coming back to bite us on the arse. |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 13, 2018 8:07:47 GMT
Hmmmmm .... not sure that bears much examination. Do we have a similar problem with all other groups of formerly colonised peoples?
No, we don't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 8:28:48 GMT
True. Maybe something to do with the culture/religion then. Of these ex-colonials.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 13, 2018 8:31:00 GMT
Yep definitely the most important part of this story is the BBC reporting... The silence and carpet underbrushing surrounding the whole issue is definitely a huge part if it. Yeah, and it speaks to a neverneverland patrician outlook which is almost a badge of office for the Ham & High BBC liberal arts crowd. Anyone seen the recent TV mini-series "Collateral?" Here's a couple of reviews "In a previous article I used the word “sermon” to describe some of the dialogue in David Hare’s Collateral. I now wish to retract that. Compared with what he’d saved for the finale, that was no sermon, it was a little light tutelage. The real preaching came in a painfully long scene between the disillusioned MP David Mars (John Simm) and the Labour Party leader Deborah Clifford (Saskia Reeves), which was like being waterboarded with political pamphlets. Each time you thought, “Nah, this cringey homily will end now,” there was more, delivered with the subtlety of a power hose." "Collateral (BBC1, Monday) is billed as ‘a modern-day state of the nation project’ — and therein lies its doom. Screenwriter David Hare is so eager to treat us to his worthy sociopolitical insights on immigration, the gig economy, xenophobia and suchlike that he skimps on the basics. Plot, dialogue, structure, background research, character, dramatic tension, plausibility and verisimilitude, for example. If this tripe is worth watching for any reason at all, it’s for the insights it offers into the unbearable torturedness of being an artsy-fartsy metropolitan liberal type in Brexit Britain. In fact, it should have been called simply Being Sir David Hare, for that’s all it is: a rehearsal of bien-pensant prejudices shoehorned, with all the subtlety of a medieval morality play, into a half-hearted stab at a detective yarn, turd-polished by a decent budget, some nervy, frenetic camerawork, and an all-star cast led by Carey Mulligan. The dramatis personae include: a blameless trio of Iraqi immigrants; a likeable, philandering but principled Labour MP and his can-do black female aide; a lesbian vicar and her Vietnamese immigrant girlfriend who just wants a home in Britain, is that too much to ask?; a japesome but brilliant pathologist of Asian extraction; a worldly-wise, cynical but rock-solid black detective; and — the main character — a female detective inspector (Mulligan) at once so unflappable, sensitive, reasonable, intuitive and empathetic it’s a wonder she needs four episodes to solve the crime. My guess is that the hateful white middle- class people dunit. Well, obviously they did, because as Hare keeps signalling to us with his special writer’s sledgehammer, they’re all just oozing entitlement and prejudice and uncaringness. Toffee-nosed members of the armed forces, especially: they’re clearly up to no good, what with their sexism, racism, jingoism and frankly insane idea that immigrants might pose any kind of a terror threat. How on earth did such a feeble, meandering script attract a cast in the league of Carey Mulligan, John Simm, Nicola Walker, Billie Piper and Ben Miles? Possibly, it was just the Hare cachet. Probably, though, it was because the right-on politics simply blinded them to its flaws. Same goes for the commissioning editors. Same, probably, for everyone who ever made Hare’s career happen. Was he ever really any good, does anyone know? Or is he the dramatic equivalent of the kind of artists who flourished under Stalin: second-raters with only one real talent — the ability to toe the party line." Sir David Hare was educated at Lancing College (a Harry Potteresque public school a couple of miles from where I'm sitting) and Jesus College, Cambridge. He lives in Hampstead, natch. |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 13, 2018 8:33:55 GMT
True. Maybe something to do with the culture/religion then. Of these ex-colonials. Not all of them were ex-colonials. A few of them were independent or client-state rapist monsters. There were all, however, muslims. To a man. |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 13, 2018 8:40:57 GMT
The silence and carpet underbrushing surrounding the whole issue is definitely a huge part if it. Yeah, and it speaks to a neverneverland patrician outlook which is almost a badge of office for the Ham & High BBC liberal arts crowd. Anyone seen the recent TV mini-series "Collateral?" Here's a couple of reviews "In a previous article I used the word “sermon” to describe some of the dialogue in David Hare’s Collateral. I now wish to retract that. Compared with what he’d saved for the finale, that was no sermon, it was a little light tutelage. The real preaching came in a painfully long scene between the disillusioned MP David Mars (John Simm) and the Labour Party leader Deborah Clifford (Saskia Reeves), which was like being waterboarded with political pamphlets. Each time you thought, “Nah, this cringey homily will end now,” there was more, delivered with the subtlety of a power hose." "Collateral (BBC1, Monday) is billed as ‘a modern-day state of the nation project’ — and therein lies its doom. Screenwriter David Hare is so eager to treat us to his worthy sociopolitical insights on immigration, the gig economy, xenophobia and suchlike that he skimps on the basics. Plot, dialogue, structure, background research, character, dramatic tension, plausibility and verisimilitude, for example. If this tripe is worth watching for any reason at all, it’s for the insights it offers into the unbearable torturedness of being an artsy-fartsy metropolitan liberal type in Brexit Britain. In fact, it should have been called simply Being Sir David Hare, for that’s all it is: a rehearsal of bien-pensant prejudices shoehorned, with all the subtlety of a medieval morality play, into a half-hearted stab at a detective yarn, turd-polished by a decent budget, some nervy, frenetic camerawork, and an all-star cast led by Carey Mulligan. The dramatis personae include: a blameless trio of Iraqi immigrants; a likeable, philandering but principled Labour MP and his can-do black female aide; a lesbian vicar and her Vietnamese immigrant girlfriend who just wants a home in Britain, is that too much to ask?; a japesome but brilliant pathologist of Asian extraction; a worldly-wise, cynical but rock-solid black detective; and — the main character — a female detective inspector (Mulligan) at once so unflappable, sensitive, reasonable, intuitive and empathetic it’s a wonder she needs four episodes to solve the crime. My guess is that the hateful white middle- class people dunit. Well, obviously they did, because as Hare keeps signalling to us with his special writer’s sledgehammer, they’re all just oozing entitlement and prejudice and uncaringness. Toffee-nosed members of the armed forces, especially: they’re clearly up to no good, what with their sexism, racism, jingoism and frankly insane idea that immigrants might pose any kind of a terror threat. How on earth did such a feeble, meandering script attract a cast in the league of Carey Mulligan, John Simm, Nicola Walker, Billie Piper and Ben Miles? Possibly, it was just the Hare cachet. Probably, though, it was because the right-on politics simply blinded them to its flaws. Same goes for the commissioning editors. Same, probably, for everyone who ever made Hare’s career happen. Was he ever really any good, does anyone know? Or is he the dramatic equivalent of the kind of artists who flourished under Stalin: second-raters with only one real talent — the ability to toe the party line." Sir David Hare was educated at Lancing College (a Harry Potteresque public school a couple of miles from where I'm sitting) and Jesus College, Cambridge. He lives in Hampstead, natch. Hahaha brilliant. I might watch an episode or two for a laugh. |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Mar 13, 2018 8:49:06 GMT
You won't laugh, believe me. It's dreadful. Just dreadful.
Mrs. Baloo lost her rag with me for my constant exasperated outbursts and I stopped watching it. I just couldn't stand it. She came to the same conclusion. Interestingly, all her mates were raving about it on social media. Then she posted the reviews above and they all ended up agreeing that it was a shocker. The thing is, it does seem to be a formula: boxes populated. I know that there are confident capable women, decent black people, lesbians, entitled middle class men and pregnant women. Do they all have to be present in every single drama?
|
|
nobody
New Member
Posts: 8,733 
|
Post by nobody on Mar 13, 2018 8:59:22 GMT
Yup
Total shite
|
|
|
|
Post by unclejunior on Mar 13, 2018 9:21:52 GMT
The Mirror’s 18-month investigation reveals abuse on unprecedented levels.
Social workers knew of abuse in the 1990s but police took a decade to launch a probe
Council staff viewed abused and trafficked children as “prostitutes” instead of victims, according to previously unseen files
Authorities failed to keep details of abusers from Asian communities for fear of “racism”
Police failed to investigate one recent case five times until an MP intervened
One victim said cops tried to stop her finding out why her abusers had not been prosecuted because they feared she would talk to us
Forty f**k**g years??
If what the Mirror says is correct there should be multiple prosecutions here and not just of those directly involved in the abuse. This seems like a joint enterprise to obstruct justice.
Btw the population of Telford is about 120k & less than 5% are "Asian".
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 13, 2018 9:51:14 GMT
You won't laugh, believe me. It's dreadful. Just dreadful. Mrs. Baloo lost her rag with me for my constant exasperated outbursts and I stopped watching it. I just couldn't stand it. She came to the same conclusion. Interestingly, all her mates were raving about it on social media. Then she posted the reviews above and they all ended up agreeing that it was a shocker. The thing is, it does seem to be a formula: boxes populated. I know that there are confident capable women, decent black people, lesbians, entitled middle class men and pregnant women. Do they all have to be present in every single drama? Don’t see why not. They’re just people. It is weird that you place women in that special representation group given that they form the majority of the population. Particularly as you don’t include “confident, capable men” in the description. |
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 13, 2018 10:42:53 GMT
That's the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 13, 2018 10:45:32 GMT
So why is it odd that they include women plus the other people mentioned? If it was strong capable men plus the others mentioned would it be so odd to place them in one show? It’s just odd to refer a majority group as if it was a minority group. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Mar 13, 2018 10:46:26 GMT
I mean all those people exist so I would fully expect them to appear l, representations of all of them, in most dramas just naturally.
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 61,016
Member is Online
|
Post by mids on Mar 13, 2018 10:59:25 GMT
Because the playwright is a SJW who thinks that there are not enough positive depictions of protected groups on telly and so has filled his script with them. The sort of thing the Guardian complains about on a daily basis.
|
|
nobody
New Member
Posts: 8,733
|
Post by nobody on Mar 13, 2018 11:22:19 GMT
Somewhere, SS is having a quiet chuckle and would love to tell some here, “see, told you”
|
|
