advertisement


Jerry Sadowitz cancelled

He said that the country is run by "women and blacks" and Sunak is a prick ...
Context is everything and we don’t have that. I’d be amazed if he said any of the things alleged unless he was being ironic. The venue’s not a typical BNP branch social choice.
TheDecameron has cracked the nut.
It's a matter of fact white men remain largely in charge. Is it possible JS was cracking an ironic joke, and so supporting marginalised and minority groups? I know - it's a crazy idea! But it wouldn't be the first time well meaning but unconsciously authoritarian leaning youth, anti-science celebrity scientists, and political commentators (who don't practice what they preach), have got a situation arse about tit. What happened to healthy scepticism? I ask in context of the members who were flapping and grumbling about the correct use of "cancelled" on this thread.

PS Sunak is a prick. Perhaps JS was channelling Ted Chippington.

It’s comedic in itself seeing The Daily Mail complaining about racism, homophobia and misogyny in their article about Sadowitz. They've been turning a profit from all three for decades now.
Same goes for the provisional wing of progressivism, although not for as long. Unintentional comedy from the two cheeks of the same authoritarian arse.
 
so what is P... anyway? Punk?
OMG not **** surely..... someone born in abbreviated form in pakistan?
and
PFM won't let me type in that word
hahahahahha
OMG
 
Remember an Australian cricket commentator saying once during a World Cup match ( early 90 s ) " thats a great start for the P.....
You could tell he had no idea his remark was offensive. AFAIK there was no backlash to the remark either. I was kinda stunned tbh
 
Remember an Australian cricket commentator saying once during a World Cup match ( early 90 s ) " thats a great start for the P.....
You could tell he had no idea his remark was offensive. AFAIK there was no backlash to the remark either. I was kinda stunned tbh
I remember the term being used by a cricket commentator in the 80s! I was on exercise at RAF Marham, in a Hardened Aircraft Shelter, in the crewroom. Even then, we all looked around and wondered whether he was allowed to say that.
 
In teens worked backstage on a comedy show 1980ish. I'd not heard of Roy 'chubby' Brown, so got a shock and was appalled. It didn't occur to demand cancellation, but surely would've being 100% age appropriate self-righteous. I asked the stage manager if I could bail out. Said he couldn't stop me, but it was on me to check what I'd agreed to work on, so no work in future. Ouch!

But he agreed show was bigoted tripe, & said I should stay. Apart from not losing work he had a plan. He asked assistant SM and me to join him in declining the get out, and leave the rest to him. Brown liked to hand over the cash in person, and when he came onstage after show SM politely declined his money. Brown asked why and SM declined to answer explaining would be unprofessional and cause trouble. Brown said you can't offend me, I won't complain to the boss, etc. SM says to assistant and me 'you both heard that?' With witnesses in place he explained to Brown why we didn't want his money. At full power and no holds barred. Brown turned a furious purple colour and flounced off the stage without another word. He had taken offence.

I’ve never revisited Browns’ oeuvre and don’t intend to. From what I remember much of the show would be illegal today. I believe that's for the good which is hypocritical. We all have our limits.
 
TheDecameron has cracked the nut.
It's a matter of fact white men remain largely in charge. Is it possible JS was cracking an ironic joke, and so supporting marginalised and minority groups? I know - it's a crazy idea! But it wouldn't be the first time well meaning but unconsciously authoritarian leaning youth, anti-science celebrity scientists, and political commentators (who don't practice what they preach), have got a situation arse about tit. What happened to healthy scepticism? I ask in context of the members who were flapping and grumbling about the correct use of "cancelled" on this thread.

The problem with Sadowitz, and other 'ironic' shock peddlers is the infamous but well established 'Alf Garnett' effect.

At first lauded by those who were very clever and recognised the biting wit and satirical edge ... but later horrified to discover that racists and right-wing thugs celebrated Alf's repulsive outpourings and exposure on national telly in equal measure.

Irony is unfortunately not always the best weapon :(
 
Nor is whipping out your cock live in stage. Not sure what subtle political or cultural point was being made with that gesture.
 
If you own a venue or platform you can host/not host whatever the hell you like. The term “cancelled” is used by the far right to push their racist and homophobic ideas onto student unions etc who do not want them. It is not a term I’d use outside this context. A venue rejecting an offensive comedian after one show is an entirely different thing IMO. It is no different to say pfm refusing to platform Britain First shit etc.
I agree with the first line but not the second. Speakers are being stopped from talking at Universities for having an opposing opinion, not racist or homophobic, just different. Surely everything should be discussed openly & if anyone has an issue, discuss it, debate it.
 
I agree with the first line but not the second. Speakers are being stopped from talking at Universities for having an opposing opinion, not racist or homophobic, just different. Surely everything should be discussed openly & if anyone has an issue, discuss it, debate it.
Can you give an example? The situations I've heard about were speakers with a very unsavoury position, not just an alternative take worth examining or discussing.
 
I agree with the first line but not the second. Speakers are being stopped from talking at Universities for having an opposing opinion, not racist or homophobic, just different. Surely everything should be discussed openly & if anyone has an issue, discuss it, debate it.

Who is booked to speak at their student union venue should be up to those directly involved IMHO. It is all part of the democratic process of running a student union and it will rightly differ across the country based on the demographics involved, e.g. I bet the speakers at Oxbridge will be more establishment/right-wing than those in say Sheffield or Liverpool. I have no issue with this, it is just democratic process. If a section of the student population don’t like it they are free to engage with that democratic process. Our alt-right Tory government should certainly not be imposing Toby Young, Nigel Farage, JK Rowling or whoever on student unions who think these people are arseholes. They have no inherent “right” to that platform, it is for those who run them to invite whoever they choose.

PS Whilst I am certain the above is the right approach part of me favours the book them and absolutely rip them apart alternative. Just give them no respect and nowhere to hide.
 
Can you give an example? The situations I've heard about were speakers with a very unsavoury position, not just an alternative take worth examining or discussing.
You could try doing some research?

Your position is anti-free speech, circular and fundamentally condescending. Try Julie Bindel at York earlier this year. What is so 'unsavoury' about her opinions that she shouldn't be heard by interested people?
 
Can you give an example? The situations I've heard about were speakers with a very unsavoury position, not just an alternative take worth examining or discussing.

Here's an (admittedly ancient) piece by Ian Dunt in the Graun about some controversial no platforming in Goldsmiths a while back.

https://www.theguardian.com/educati...-or-free-speech-crisis-debate-uk-universities

I don't think it's any surprise that young students in a London art college will have more progressive or radical views on topics like trans equality and sex work than perhaps a lot of the population.

It's ironic in a way. Whenever people make a fuss about no platforming shutting down debate on a particular issue it always seems to lead to, er, endless debate.
 


advertisement


Back
Top