pride vs rte (3 Viewers)

JohnnyRaz

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
6,224
Location
drifting arround
don't know if anyone has a take on this?


Liveline is a good 50% people giving out irrationally about things and people they don't understand..
 

Deadmanposting

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,623
don't know if anyone has a take on this?


Liveline is a good 50% people giving out irrationally about things and people they don't understand..
Very tough one

I heard some of that Liveline and Joe seemed very open and understanding – he was in full Joe Compassion mode
I did not hear the whole show. He might have been a prick also.

It is difficult to talk about the coverage without getting into the trans debate, which is almost always fraught.


I think it’s telling the Pride group are not saying what was offensive or dangerous.
I feel there’s a tendency among the highly politicised trans advocates, that you're either fully with them or you are a danger and you are causing harm

For something that is difficult for a lot of people to get their heads around, for me, that removal of nuance and space for debate isn’t helpful.
And especially on Liveline whose target audience is middle Ireland.

I think most people want everyone to be able to lead fulfilling happy lives and be their authentic selves in society. Be that straight or L or G or B or T or Q or whatever you feel defines you.
Closing off engagement seems counterproductive, when everyone pretty much wants the same thing.
 

nuke terrorist

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
3,654
Location
'north munster'
Liveline is a terrible format which seems to attract twits. I'd scrap it completely and have detested it for over 30 years.
I used to eat my lunch outside in the mid 90s to avoid listening to Marian Finucane.
the format which seems to attract people who don't know what they are talking about (esp Marian) or fools with nothing better to do.
the worst one I heard was a veteran trad musician settling a score with a young woman musician who he had a grudge against. she had done him no wrong and the programme was facilitating bullying.
 

Unicron

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2003
Messages
18,572
Solutions
2
Location
Near Cybertron
Website
theformersovietreublic.bandcamp.com
All the biggest dickheads on Irish twitter will be shiteing on about how RTE is being "cancelled."

The fact of the matter is that a partner of Dublin Pride is acting in a manner which is at odds with DP's purpose so why should that partnership not be ended?

A fun fact I discovered down this wormhole today, in the seanad there is at least one member who I'd happily describe as an Orban admiring fash lover.
 

riath

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
4,649
Solutions
1
A fun fact I discovered down this wormhole today, in the seanad there is at least one member who I'd happily describe as an Orban admiring fash lover.
There’s definitely more than one.

Trinners also had to apologise for saying Pride flags shouldn’t be raised this year in case it causes offence. Considering there was a double murder this year and an increase in possible homophonic assaults, a few flags would have been nice.
 

flashback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
8,887
Location
Trumpland
not really related, but I succumbed to the pressure of Aulfla and kids demanding a TV, with a TV purchase.

Out of nationalistic duty I tried to set the yoke up to play RTE, via the app.

Is the app shit or is it just me? I gave it three tries, was spammed to ever living fuck with the same three ads about 9 times in all, and gave up. App is still on my phone, but I'm suspecting RTE might be dead to me.

Related, I have the radio on Radio 1 in the car. It's not a trainwreck. Is there anything on RTE that's ever worth watching? When I was trying to set it up it suggested that Dr Oz was "live". Is that really the sort of shite they're pedaling or is there other stuff in there that isn't wrong / awful / much much worse than staring the TV turned off.
 

riath

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
4,649
Solutions
1
I've no doubt but I only heard about this one, Sharon Keoghan, today.
She’s a member of the Committee on surrogacy and was a member of the committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Equality and Youth (she’s since resigned). She’s mentioned microchipping disabled kids, that Trans kids might not be trans if they had a pretty dress, people use surrogacy like they do picking out what they want in a supermarket etc etc.
Have a look at some of her exchanges in the committee room, they’re something else.
 

Unicron

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2003
Messages
18,572
Solutions
2
Location
Near Cybertron
Website
theformersovietreublic.bandcamp.com
She’s a member of the Committee on surrogacy and was a member of the committee on Children, Equality, Disability, Equality and Youth (she’s since resigned). She’s mentioned microchipping disabled kids, that Trans kids might not be trans if they had a pretty dress, people use surrogacy like they do picking out what they want in a supermarket etc etc.
Have a look at some of her exchanges in the committee room, they’re something else.

I was reading her wiki earlier which gave a bit of a summary of her positions. Seems like a real piece of work.
 

Cornu Ammonis

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
9,413
Solutions
2
Location
Dublin
Website
brainwashed.com
I think it’s telling the Pride group are not saying what was offensive or dangerous.
I feel there’s a tendency among the highly politicised trans advocates, that you're either fully with them or you are a danger and you are causing harm
None of this feels wrong to me. I’m sure they’ve listed the particulars in any official complaint so why repeat the things they find offensive or dangerous in a public statement? They don’t need to justify their offence to you.

And yes, the great strength of the Pride movement has been to say if you’re not with them, you’re against them. Much like the anti-racism movement has taken the line that if you’re not actually addressing racism then you’re not truly with them. It’s not enough to just not be racist, you need to counter the actual racism that doesn’t stop just because you personally do not use racial slurs or commit acts of violence on those different to you.

These are human rights issues that impact on people’s day-to-day lives, not just inconsequential opinions from Tullamore. (Used as an example, not suggesting Tullamore is necessarily a hotbed of anti-trans fervour.)
 

flashback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
8,887
Location
Trumpland
It is difficult to talk about the coverage without getting into the trans debate, which is almost always fraught.
one of the reasons it's fraught is because if you're a trans woman (I guess the is derived from experience in the US but I'd say it might generalize): you're going to get beaten up for being trans.

It's not if, it's when. And you'll be beaten up for being trans, not for some other reason. And you'll be beaten up even if you pass.

And *when* you're beaten up you have two options: get The Plod involved or don't. If you get cops involved, you're in for a world of hurt, and likely get into more trouble / arrested. (That's if cops weren't the ones who attacked you in the first place, which is not unlikely.) So you avoid reporting it, and then you skew that statistic.

But yeah, you will get beaten up, and it will happen more than once probably. So every day you step outside you roll those dice. And in the meantime you've got shitheads who heard about someone once on TV who's *really a bloke* and they're going to get attacked in the jacks because of that.

So yeah, I suppose like @Cornu Ammonis was saying there, if you're neutral on a group of people who justifiably don't feel it's safe to step out of their house, then you're on the wrong side.
 

Deadmanposting

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,623
None of this feels wrong to me. I’m sure they’ve listed the particulars in any official complaint so why repeat the things they find offensive or dangerous in a public statement? They don’t need to justify their offence to you.
I don't need them to justify anything to me. They can do what they want.
But the debate was about legislation changes wanted by trans advocates, which is fine, go for it. Change the law.
But you have to accept people are going to want to talk about changes to legislation. That's part and parcel of democracy.
If people don't know what is not to be said, without the other side withdrawing and labeling people as hatemongers, then there is no debate to be had.

And this is a very nuanced issue. Many many people - in Tullamore an elsewhere - don't get it. It wants talking about.
If not talking is a strength in your view, then that's fine. But that is certainly what's going on.
It could very well be a winning strategy on the issue but it's very easy to see it as a strategy of shutting down debate by painting anyone who doesn't agree with you as a hateful person.


The hour or so I have heard, was respectful, if not contentious.
But you'd expect some contentiousness on matters of legislation and identity.


There was plenty of lunacy on the airwaves from loo-lahs (John Waters et al) during marriage equality on RTE and Pride didn't sever ties. There were enough people sure of their position to go on and counter the other side and they won the argument by a fair stretch on the day.
Pride have deferred to the trans groups on the matter of severing ties with RTE.
 

Deadmanposting

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,623
This is the episode for anyone interested
(I think)




There's mostly people back and forth between two sides - pick your fighter kind of deal

But there's a lady at about 47:00 who's actually thoughtful and trying to balance every concern out - it's like listening to a tightrope walk act though
She seems genuinely kind and you'd laser in on her at a dinner party

Colette is her name.
I have only listened to about 3 minutes of her though.
 

nuke terrorist

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
3,654
Location
'north munster'
prior to social media, day time radio and TV were the twits media of choice.

It doesn't give proper scrunity to silly people like a political journalist should and all kinds of daft to dangerous nonsense has been treated with respect it doesn't deserve or given a free pass.
giving supernatural or spiritual or much worse health/medicine scaremongering coverage is creating an environment where things like Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the MMR autism fraud are given huge coverage.

various examples of this - and there are many:

on Wednesday, day time TV show Loose Women presenters/panel had a piece where they expressed their thoughts on pharmacists possibly being allowed prescribe medicines. none of the people there were doctors or seemed to have any specialist knowledge. the last time I saw this show last winter they were talking about masks being reintroduced in certain indoor places during the third wave of Covid.
again the regular presenters were expressing strong opinions about mask wearing without any medical expert present.

these sort of programmes have regular stuff aimed at hypochondriacs.

Decades ago Gerry Ryan on his morning radio show interviewed a woman who said she went into her daughters bedroom one night and saw the child in a trance with sparks flying out of her (!!!) what was this supposed to signify??).
I was left wondering was she a hoaxer, actor or a crazy person. Yet Ryan treated her seriously which he was in fairness brilliant at doing with farcical stuff.
I very rarely heard his programme but Ryan covered nonsense like this a lot it seemed.

Prior to the Late Late Show Pat Kenny had a very lightweight chat show on Saturday nights in the late 80's with often rubbishy guests. One was Rael the Raelian cult leader.
Kenny gave a very soft interview with this man who claimed to have been abducted by aliens and taken to another planet where everyone was cloned and they were the creators of us Earthlings.
Pat couldn't have been easier on him.

I saw a doc about a fantasist in Australia who claimed she had an aggressive form of cancer but through a raw fruit diet she was able to stay healthy.
after conquering social media she got lots of positive coverage on TV, publishing deals etc. but she was eventually forced to admit she never had cancer.

whatever about having well thought through social or political opinions, things like the above crap should not be given any traction - these people are frauds or delusional and a danger to themselves.
day time radio and TV is full of stuff like this and it creates a environment where some people will take any old bullshit seriously - fake news?
 
New posts

Users who are viewing this thread

  • 21 Day Calendar

    Lightning Bolt
    Whelans
    25 Wexford St, Portobello, Dublin 2, D02 H527, Ireland
    Panikatax, Chimers (Australia), Fierce Shook, Carpark Sci-fi
    Bello Bar
    1 Portobello Harbour, Saint Kevin's, Dublin, Ireland
    Kurt Vile & The Violators
    Vicar Street
    Vicar St, Saint Catherine's, Dublin, Ireland

    Latest Activity

    Loading…

    Support thumped.com

    Support thumped.com and upgrade your account

    Upgrade your account now to disable all ads... If we had any... Which we don't right now.

    Upgrade now

    Latest posts

    Trending Threads

    Latest threads

    Top