BBC apologises after Mensa guest says anyone with an IQ of 60 is a ‘carrot’

At the end of the day he did not direct any statement or off the cuff remark at anyone with learning difficulties ,he did not say "people with learning difficulties and a IQ of 60 are carrots" he was referring to average people and quite a few i know could easily be described as a carrot .It's absolutely ridiculous that such a fuss is made when people make these kind of remarks .Listen to the full interview and take in the context it was said in ,don't analyze it and try to find hidden meanings that aren't there

[colin25]

What about the carrots? They are the ones insulted

[thenry]

the vitamins are offended.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Read the quote above - the word 'black' wasn't removed.....

btw, loved the last link in your post - the viewpoint of an organisation run by a man who used to fund the BNP is bound to be truly unbiased......

*sighs*

If you'd even read the articles you'd realise that yes, they actually DID remove the word black - unless the express article misreported the facts.

A NURSERY school has been accused of “political correctness gone mad” by removing the word “black” from a nursery rhyme.

Excuse me for reading the article and jumping to that conclusion, God forbid !

btw, loved the last link in your post - the viewpoint of an organisation run by a man who used to fund the BNP is bound to be truly unbiased......

I fail to understand why in various discussions, you seem to take a certain gratification by repeatedly dredging up little "ignoratio elenchis", as if they change anything or prove anything in any way relevant to the point of the discussion.

Though granted, it was late last night and I didn't actually see the "Britain First" wording, but there were so many articles on this topic to choose from, I didn't even look. Just skim read the article, that's all.

I could understand your critique IF there isn't excessive political correctness in schools, but surely you agree that there is? So if you agree, then why try to find some flaw in what I'm writing, when you agree that there is a problem?

On the other hand, maybe you don't agree. Perhaps you think the status quo is fine and dandy. If that's the case, then I can understand your approach.

But here's the problem...

Not Britain first nor the BNP wrote this article I linked to earlier:
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6004257

They didn't write this one either:
Children accused of bigotry

Nor this one:
3 year olds labeled bigots

Nor this one:
7 year old boy accused of racism
From the above link:

A primary school in Hull has issued a statement claiming it acted "in accordance with council guidance on reporting racist incidents" after a boy of SEVEN was accused of making a racist remark to another pupil.

Little Elliott Dearlove had asked a classmate if he was "brown because he was from Africa."

There are endless examples of cases like these, and I don't think they fall apart under analysis, unless I'm missing something here and if so - then by all means tell me what it is.

Its all PC madness I tell you !

*sigh* yourself, buddy.

It has been proven that the article you quoted was incorrect - Private Eye, as I quoted earlier, stated (and here it is again just in case your missed it)

For the record, the charity Parents and Children Together, which runs the two play groups at the centre of last week's outbreak, told the Press Association that "children at the two family centres sing a variety of descriptive words in the nursery rhyme to turn the song into an action rhyme. They sing happy, sad, bouncing, hopping, pink, blue, black and white sheep etc. This encourages the children to extend their vocabulary."

Curiously, this explanation went unreported by any of the national papers.

So you appear to be using something that was made up by the tabloids to prove your point...

I agree with you that some people feel the need to, for whatever reason, over-compensate, and this is wrong - however, it doesn't lessen the point I was trying to make which was that the original "black sheep" stories in the popular press were complete misinterpretations of what actually happened.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

*sighs*

If you'd even read the articles you'd realise that yes, they actually DID remove the word black - unless the express article misreported the facts.



Excuse me for reading the article and jumping to that conclusion, God forbid !

<snip>

There are endless examples of cases like these, and I don't think they fall apart under analysis, unless I'm missing something here and if so - then by all means tell me what it is.

Its all PC madness I tell you !

Hugh is talking about an article in Private Eye and he posted part of it. There's no link to the original article (that I know of), but someone's posted the text here:

http://www.eurogamer.net/forum/thread/51300

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Hugh

*sigh* yourself, buddy.

It has been proven that the article you quoted was incorrect - Private Eye, as I quoted earlier, stated (and here it is again just in case your missed it)
So you appear to be using something that was made up by the tabloids to prove your point...

You say that, but yet you've proven nothing. Where is the link to this claim of yours?
An erroneous quote on this forum page is all I can see.

This is where I take issue..
After trawling the web, I've found references to this private eye story, dated 2006. Private eye reference

The dates on the articles in question I've posted, which state "black" was removed, are dated 2012. Unless private eye have invented a time machine, I don't see how a story dated 2006 has any relevance whatsoever.

*tries not to sigh*

[Russ]

Getting back to the OP, I've experienced something similar to this on a regular basis. Most people are cool about it but there are always a small few who when I mention I have ADHD imply I'm somehow 'backward' - that word even being used once. Another scenario is they'll suggest (or even state) it's just an excuse for poor/disruptive/irresponsible behaviour. I'm cool with it by now (although that doesn't excuse it) and when they tell me I'm imagining it and that it's "all in your head" I reply, "It's a neurological condition, therefore of course it's in my head. Where would it be, in my ankle?"

Having never received a suitable comeback from that, I always enjoy the look on their face as they slink away

Originally Posted by Sparkle

*sighs*

If you'd even read the articles you'd realise that yes, they actually DID remove the word black - unless the express article misreported the facts.



Excuse me for reading the article and jumping to that conclusion, God forbid !



I fail to understand why in various discussions, you seem to take a certain gratification by repeatedly dredging up little "ignoratio elenchis", as if they change anything or prove anything in any way relevant to the point of the discussion.

Though granted, it was late last night and I didn't actually see the "Britain First" wording, but there were so many articles on this topic to choose from, I didn't even look. Just skim read the article, that's all.

I could understand your critique IF there isn't excessive political correctness in schools, but surely you agree that there is? So if you agree, then why try to find some flaw in what I'm writing, when you agree that there is a problem?

On the other hand, maybe you don't agree. Perhaps you think the status quo is fine and dandy. If that's the case, then I can understand your approach.

But here's the problem...

Not Britain first nor the BNP wrote this article I linked to earlier:
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6004257

They didn't write this one either:
Children accused of bigotry

Nor this one:
3 year olds labeled bigots

Nor this one:
7 year old boy accused of racism
From the above link:


There are endless examples of cases like these, and I don't think they fall apart under analysis, unless I'm missing something here and if so - then by all means tell me what it is.

Its all PC madness I tell you !

After a bit of digging i have found the real reason why these children get "reported for racism" simple answer is they don't .What is being reported is all inappropriate behavior by all pupils of any age .It is a monitoring exercise and a way of gauging the parents responsibility to the child ,in other words if the parents are openly racist in front of the child at home then that is carried into the school ,the same with bullying patterns emerge and racist/bullying parents can be spoken to and children who grow into racist bullies can be addressed at a earlier age .Yes it can be construed as big brother tactics but there is a purpose that has been blatantly misrepresented by the likes of the Mail .

link