Black Lives Matter

Also should we hand back looted treasures?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...-era-jfhpn8mwp

[Pierre]

I understand the point made by some that would a Jewish person enjoy walking past a statue of Hitler.

I understand that entirely. It is still, just, within living memory.

But when you get a few hundred years down the line it is different. It becomes of its time and should be judged objectively and remembered, with thought and explanation not ignorance and violence.

---------- Post added at 22:38 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy

Also should we hand back looted treasures?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...-era-jfhpn8mwp

Our museums would be empty.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Paul

The insanity and censorship continues ;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319

Personally I never liked the show, not my kind of humour, but this is just moronic.

Why?

Matt Lucas and David Walliams have both stated they regret the segments of the shows that have caused the removal from streaming services.

---------- Post added at 22:43 ---------- Previous post was at 22:41 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I understand the point made by some that would a Jewish person enjoy walking past a statue of Hitler.

I understand that entirely. It is still, just, within living memory.

But when you get a few hundred years down the line it is different. It becomes of its time and should be judged objectively and remembered, with thought and explanation not ignorance and violence.

Except the statues of Hitler were taken down within the lifetimes of those affected. Those that were affected by the people who statues we are talking about didn't have the ability to influence that at the time, mainly because they were still (and are to a level) discriminated against.

Originally Posted by Pierre

But when you get a few hundred years down the line it is different. It becomes of its time and should be judged objectively and remembered, with thought and explanation not ignorance and violence.

But if that's not what is happening, instead those people are being celebrated, then what?

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Matt Lucas and David Walliams have both stated they regret the segments of the shows that have caused the removal from streaming services.

Of course they have, the twatter mob would be on them in a flash if they said anything else.
Given how anyone who dares to do something the mob disagrees with gets fired (even if it was years ago) they will of course say whatever they think people want to hear.

No one forces anyone to watch TV.
I'm also pretty sure everyone (black/white/whatever) is perfectly capable of making a choice whether to watch or not to watch something, and actually have a sense of reality, they know its a comedy show, from the past.

I know, from friends of mine who are not white (and btw, not hetro) that they find this kind of thing, where others censor on their behalf, to be quite insulting. It implies they have no sense of humour at all, must be offended by everything, and cannot laugh at themselves.

If you cannot understand censorship, then you will certainly enjoy the 1984 world we are moving towards.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Paul

Of course they have, the twatter mob would be on them in a flash if they said anything else.

They've been saying it for several years now

https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2...rent-time-now/
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ety-empathetic

Although even then it's a little bit of a hypocritical standpoint as they then did Come Fly With Me which was called out from the outset as in the same vein of racial stereotypes

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...me-fly-with-me

Which doesnt change that point one bit.
Sensible people watch what they say on any SM.
An actor on 'The Flash' was fired just yesterday for comments made 6-7 years ago.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Paul

No one forces anyone to watch TV.
I'm also pretty sure everyone (black/white/whatever) is perfectly capable of making a choice whether to watch or not to watch something, and actually have a sense of reality, they know its a comedy show, from the past.

Attitudes change, and society changes.

We don't tolerate adverts for tobacco now, even though they used to be extremely popular. The Black and White Minstrel show used to be a popular show in the UK, and still was relatively popular at it's point of cancellation. However we wouldn't even consider repeating it today because views have evolved.

I know, from friends of mine who are not white (and btw, not hetro) that they find this kind of thing, where others censor on their behalf, to be quite insulting. It implies they have no sense of humour at all, must be offended by everything, and cannot laugh at themselves.

If you cannot understand censorship, then you will certainly enjoy the 1984 world we are moving towards.

There is a difference between shows that allow anyone to laugh at themselves and those that are designed to mock others because of physical or other attributes.

Shows like Desmond's or Goodness Gracious Me are rightly celebrated as comedy greats because they were created by people from the background of those it was making fun of, and the comedy came from the experiences of those people, not 'haha aren't those people strange because they're not like us'.

Similar discussions are being held about the representations of the LGBTQ+ communities and people with health conditions or impairments as to how best represent them in media and entertainment.

Originally Posted by BenMcr

We don't tolerate adverts for tobacco now, even though they used to be extremely popular.

TV Shows dont give you cancer, totally different thing.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

You seem aware of that already and so have context around his life and history.

How many people know that Nelson was pro slavery for instance. Or that the other people that are being mentioned when it comes to their statues were directly connected to the slave trade.

This is not about enlightening the British people. Their ignorance is boundless and could be reduced any number of ways. This is about removing heroes and cultural touchstones so they can be replaced by new ones. At the demand of a mob I will add i.e. Iconoclasm.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Paul

TV Shows dont give you cancer, totally different thing.

So if it's different then why do we have a watershed and film ratings.

Media can influence ideas and attitudes as much as any physical products can affect health.

Originally Posted by downquark1

This is not about enlightening the British people. Their ignorance is boundless and could be reduced any number of ways. This is about removing heroes and cultural touchstones so they can be replaced by new ones. At the demand of a mob I will add i.e. Iconoclasm.

As I said before, my personal view is that the re-evaluation is the key here. But where the only reason for the statue in the first place is due to the ability to be a philanthropist due their slave trade wealth, then that is a problem that needs to be discussed. The statue in Bristol has been talked about for many years before the recent action. No-one could agree on an acceptable solution. Same for the Rhodes situation in Oxford.

BTW, the BNP have also been calling for statues of Nelson Mandela to be taken down. Do I agree with that? No. Do I accept they have a right within our society to raise it as discussion due to some of the actions of the ANC? Yes.

Originally Posted by BenMcr

So if it's different then why do we have a watershed and film ratings.

Sorry but I dont understand the relevance of either of these.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Paul

Sorry but I dont understand the relevance of either of these.

Following your point that

I'm also pretty sure everyone (black/white/whatever) is perfectly capable of making a choice whether to watch or not to watch something,

what is the point of any watershed or film classifications? Surely if everyone is capable, then broadcasters should be able to show whatever they like whenever they like and leave it up to individual choice.

---------- Post added at 23:46 ---------- Previous post was at 23:42 ----------

Or maybe we accept that there is a balance between choice and control, and sometimes they don't immediately line up with one another. And that that includes re-evaluating the context of things as our views and those of our society change.

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Surely if everyone is capable, then broadcasters should be able to show whatever they like whenever they like and leave it up to individual choice.

I hope you're not being deliberately dim ?
I'm sure you know perfectly well we are referring to adults here.
As I'm equally sure you know that both exist to stop children seeing adult material (well, supposedly, we all know they dont work very well).

Again, not the same thing at all.
You can still view any show after the watershed, or any rated film, once you reach the required age.
If they simply attached a 'Viewer Discretion' warning to LB (as an example) that would be entirely different to removing it.

[Carth]

It's just got completely out of hand now, an absolute disgrace with spineless apologists rolling over and playing dead

I just hope I don't have to desecrate my Mothers grave because many years ago she used to collect the gollywog stickers off jam jars

oh, and I doubt very much if there will be anyone left on the TV and Radio if we're going back 30 years to see if they once said something that will upset the cry babies.

Welcome to Hell . . . . I think you've opened the gates