Jan and Klodi's Party Bus - part II **off topic discussion**

eeeee

ThisRegard wrote: »

Hey excuse for not doing so is pretty poor, what did she think he was going to do to her?

She complains that in her opinion Newstalk don't care about such complaints but she never followed hers up to find out.

Anyway the whole thing is a mess. I've often said on the radio thread that I believe Hook purposely winds people up with his opening monologue, and without having heard the piece, he may have pushed that too far this time. There'll be a concerted effort from everywhere now to have him fired.

May? May? No no, he went too far. Blaming the victim of rape for being raped is COMPLETELY AND ABSOLUTELY INEXCUSABLE. No argument or discussion. His absolutely reprehensible. End of.

Chuchote wrote: »

Lots of outrage about poor George Hook. When it was just people on bikes he targeted, that was ok.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/george-hook-needs-to-get-off-his-dinosaur-backside-rape-victim-criticises-broadcaster-for-outrageous-and-offensive-remarks-about-rape-36113405.html

Seriously? It wasn't ok, but this is far, far, far worse.

daragh_

magicbastarder wrote: »

have we had this here before?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5qbFpyW9Tg

Shane Stokes on vocals and lead guitar.... :-)

ThisRegard

nee wrote: »

May? May? No no, he went too far. Blaming the victim of rape for being raped is COMPLETELY AND ABSOLUTELY INEXCUSABLE. No argument or discussion. His absolutely reprehensible. End of.

No point in shouting at me is there when I said I never heard the piece, what do you hope to gain by it?

Lumen

ThisRegard wrote: »

Hey excuse for not doing so is pretty poor, what did she think he was going to do to her?

She complains that in her opinion Newstalk don't care about such complaints but she never followed hers up to find out.

The thing that you're doing there? That's victim blaming. I'm not sure you even realise you're doing it.

ThisRegard wrote: »

Anyway the whole thing is a mess. I've often said on the radio thread that I believe Hook purposely winds people up with his opening monologue, and without having heard the piece, he may have pushed that too far this time. There'll be a concerted effort from everywhere now to have him fired.

His schtick seems too effortless to be pretence. The simplest and most likely explanation is that he holds privately the views he espouses.

Still, it's all political correctness gone mad, eh, when we can't even ask rape victims to have a bit of a think about their own behaviour without getting challenged about it by SJWs. I blame the sexy children.

ThisRegard

I'm not victim blaming no matter how much you try twist it. I'm surprised you are even trying to go there.

And be snarky all you want with the political correctness sleight, it's misguided as there isn't a sniff of it from me. Being a smart ass trying to respond to a point that I never made is incredibly dumb.

OleRodrigo

ThisRegard

****, I may have a faux indignation sulkus thingy, but inverted.

Lumen

ThisRegard wrote: »

I'm not victim blaming no matter how much you try twist it.

When presented with an alleged incident you immediately moved the conversation away from the perpetrator of that incident (Hook) and on to the behaviour of the victim (Mac Cabe).

That's victim blaming, and is exactly the same line of argument that Hook pursued in the rape item.

ThisRegard

No, I didn't. I think you may be confused as to what victim blaming means

I never implied it was her own fault. I had an issue with her not following through with her complaint which ultimately may have enabled Hook to continue with his poor behaviour.

The potential of meeting someone who made sexist comments I don't believe should have stopped her. I know people who've been in her position in the workplace.

Now had I said she shouldn't have worn that particular low cut top that day allowing Hook to see a bra strap to stir up his interest then you may have a point .

RayCun

ThisRegard wrote: »

There'll be a concerted effort from everywhere now to have him fired.

People have the right to an opinion.
No one has the right to a pulpit.
Why should we have to listen to him?

There are people who express dickish opinions because they believe them.
There are people who express dickish opinions because they'll say anything for attention.
They're both dicks.

ThisRegard

I agree on your broader points.

But I can't help feel that it's long been an editorial decision to steer his show the way it's gone with his divisive rants when you contrast it to his previous drive time show.

So he has been given a pulpit and has a right to it as long as he's being paid to do so. I've long stopped taking his stance on anything seriously.

guanciale

People do hold dickish opinions or maybe even intolerant opinions. The question is whether a tolerant society should tolerate intolerant opinions.
There is a tendency nowadays to try and shut down any challenging argument shch as those raised by Hook this week (& lets face it for most if his broadcasting career). However I personally subscribe to the philosophy of Popper and that is that a tolerant society should protect tolerance by showing intolerance to intolerant viewpoints.
I do not believe that Hook is in any way a challenging contrarian but merely an misanthropic sexist. Unfortunately I cant imagine that Newstalk care.

rollingscone

ThisRegard wrote: »

I agree on your broader points.

But I can't help feel that it's long been an editorial decision to steer his show the way it's gone with his divisive rants when you contrast it to his previous drive time show.

Some people claim that this is his true feelings come out, others claim that behind the scenes he's a gent and different to his radio persona.

If you're willing to attack people for your personal gain you're not a good person regardless of how you behave in other circumstances

ThisRegard

I'm not defending the guy, I regularly think you ****ing eejit Hook when I hear him on different topics.

Chuchote

Why do we bother arguing? Humans have 3 years to utterly change our industries or climate change will become irrevocable, leading to what used to be called a nuclear winter, which the human race will not survive. Humans aren't going to make that change. We are now, effectively, extinct.

RobertFoster

Chuchote wrote: »

Why do we bother arguing? Humans have 3 years to utterly change our industries or climate change will become irrevocable, leading to what used to be called a nuclear winter, which the human race will not survive. Humans aren't going to make that change. We are now, effectively, extinct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx0W42-2pds

Chuchote

Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think
Enjoy yourself, we're living on the brink
Enjoy yourself, and watch our chances sink
Enjoy yourself, enjoy yourself, we are the Missing Link.

LollipopJimmy

Jaysis, got a little heavy in here. None of you even pay road tax

LollipopJimmy

After my escapades on the bike the last couple of weeks I had planned to do a short spin today, maybe 30kms to just loosen up. Unfortunately my dog has the runs all night and I'm letting him out and cleaning up liquid poo since 2am.

2 of our neighbours dogs had the same thing this week so I'm not too worried yet but needless to say I'm far too exhausted to even look at the bike which would need a clean and lube before I go given the last 350kms were in mostly pissing rain

Harrybelafonte

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Jaysis, got a little heavy in here. None of you even pay road tax

It was much more relevant and engaging than whether your dog had diarrhoea or not.

LollipopJimmy

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

It was much more relevant and engaging than whether your dog had diarrhoea or not.

My dog stopped me getting out on the bike and that's what I was talking about. But I do apologise for talking about cycling in the cycling forum. I'll refrain in future

Harrybelafonte

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

My dog stopped me getting out on the bike and that's what I was talking about. But I do apologise for talking about cycling in the cycling forum. I'll refrain in future

It's off topic discussion. So my point is that the "hot and heavy" stuff isn't necessarily a fault in the thread. I think it's relevant. Post whatever you want, just don't think it's right that you criticise previous discussions. Obviously that's what I'm doing now so whatever.

magicbastarder

always a first time - 50km in the mizzle today, and now i've a fierce* case of chafed nipples.

*not sure how bad a case it is in the grand scheme of things, given i've no benchmark to work against, but 'fierce' works for me.

LollipopJimmy

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

It's off topic discussion. So my point is that the "hot and heavy" stuff isn't necessarily a fault in the thread. I think it's relevant. Post whatever you want, just don't think it's right that you criticise previous discussions. Obviously that's what I'm doing now so whatever.

There was no criticism in my post, and clearly jest given the road tax jibe.

magicbastarder

yep, i took that post as just being a joke. a good one too.

ThisRegard

Today I learned "mizzle" is actually a thing and not a typo.

magicbastarder

i always just assumed it was a blend of mist and drizzle, but it has a different history:
" Origin and Etymology of mizzle

Middle English misellen; akin to Dutch dialect mizzelen to drizzle, Middle Dutch mist fog, mist"

Weepsie

Mizzle is a perfection description of most of today. There was a dampness in the air, but I don't recall being rained on for more than 30 minutes in the close to 4 hours I was out and I was wiping the glasses a fair bit

Harrybelafonte

magicbastarder wrote: »

yep, i took that post as just being a joke. a good one too.

Yes. It was a classic.

magicbastarder

Weepsie wrote: »

Mizzle is a perfection description of most of today. There was a dampness in the air, but I don't recall being rained on for more than 30 minutes in the close to 4 hours I was out and I was wiping the glasses a fair bit

one of those days of being in the right place at the right time - i found myself cycling through rain a good bit, but it was very 'sheety'; cycling in the wet for a kilometre or two, then in the dry for another km, then back in the wet, repeat ad nauseam.