Alright squire

Avatar MIA

Beanntraigheach wrote: »

but neither is being willing to passively submit to insult as so many Irish are.

Which is a stereotypical insult. :eek::p

B0jangles

Beanntraigheach wrote: »

Yes, being overly sensitive to percieved offence is definately no virtue, but neither is being willing to passively submit to insult as so many Irish are.

The sensible position is somewhere between the two extremes.

It's an position you see quite a lot here on boards; I remember a similar attitude in a work problems thread where there were a couple of posters boasting about how they work crazy hours every week for no extra pay, like it somehow made them sterner and tougher than anyone else instead of just idiots who were being taken advantage of.

Here we have posters essentially saying the Irish can take an insult better than anyone else.

No-one's going to give us a prize for being the world's best punching bag; it really is ok to object to being insulted.

Samaris

I think it's more that no-one is taking some random (and rather hysterical) windbag seriously. Nothing is going to negatively change for us based on this one eejit, so why give him the satisfaction of taking him seriously? Besides, he's dragged all sorts of problems down on his magazine so karma is returning one swift kick in return for his rather pointless wailing.

Spider Web

CrabRevolution wrote: »

You have to love boards.ie. An article is printed leveling Ireland with every insult and stereotype under the sun and criticizing our Taoiseach for having the gall not to dance to the UK's tune, and you have people here saying that if anything the article didn't abuse Irish people enough.

Yep, a very unpalatable vibe of "those uppity Irish" off it. If only they knew how many forelock tugging Irish there are to balance that out though!

I'm not easily insulted or easily outraged, and if anything I love the self deprecating sense of humour here. That doesn't mean that I have to be all "Ah shur tis all in good fun" like the Irishman stereotype in The Simpsons in order to show how thick-skinned and/or above it all I am either though. Same as what Beanntraigheach and B0jangles said.

It's a bunch of rather aggressive pot shots fired at Irish people in general, that's it - it's not humorous. There is nothing valuable in it. And of course there are responses like "There are worse insults" (never understood the point of that rebuttal in any context - there is worse, so... that changes what?) and "It's good to see something with a bit of gusto" (because that's so hard to find otherwise on this worldwide web and despite the fact it's at the expense of 4.75 million people?)

Someone said they reckoned it might have been written by an Irish person - I genuinely had the same thought too (isn't adding an "e" to the surnames Brown and Green an Irish thing?) The self loathing of a good chunk of Irish people is incredible. The only anti Irish comments I see on social media these days is from Irish people. I've always initially assumed they're from another English speaking country, only to discover subsequently that they're from right here. I honestly don't see anti Irish sentiment from British pages. If anything I get a sense of positivity.

Yeah the De Valera thing (and the Limerick pogrom of over a century ago) is always gleefully trotted out by loyalists who apparently care about the Jews of Israel, and by some Irish people who are obsessed with calling us (but not them) anti semitic.

Samaris

It's really more akin to watching some blowhard screaming on a streetcorner that the end of the world is nigh and the Irish are evil. What are you going do about it that for a start isn't tormenting the obviously afflicted? He's got the right to say what he likes, everyone else has the right to eyeball their advertisers, their advertisers have the right to pull their ads (or in Land Rover's case, look confused and say that they never placed that ad and what is Country Squire playing at).

There is no measurable difference that one man's opinion in his little corner of a country that is rapidly flinging itself off a cliff is going to make on Ireland or the Irish. I don't get offended at idiots - well, not this variety of idiot anyway. What's the point? He has made a net difference of zero.

Now, if he was saying that all Irish immigrants to the country are thieving scum or that sort of thing, I would pay more attention. That is coming closer to a call for action, a call for turning against people that can actually be harmed in his sphere of influence. But the country of Ireland isn't within that sphere. All he's done is make himself (and the mag) look, internationally, completely foolish. That is a far worse punishment than any amount of vapors I can pull.

Spider Web

Well I and others already said there's no need for offence or vapours, but no need either for "He could have said worse" type just sitting there and taking it and being the stereotype of the passive, easily ridiculed Irish person.

Samaris

Spider Web wrote: »

Well I and others already said there's no need for offence or vapours, but no need either for "He could have said worse" type just sitting there and taking it and being the stereotype of the passive, easily ridiculed Irish person.

If there's no need for offence and there's no need for shrugging and commenting that he could have said worse if he wanted to get a rise out the Irish, what on earth -is- the allowable response?

I'm going stick with taking the piss, most likely (whether or not it's needful :P) I'm probably buying into the stereotype of the heedless Irish that don't take anything seriously, but honestly, I really don't care what someone who takes stereotypes too literally thinks. Not a jab at you, rather at the columnist. Although I do think you're taking the whole aspect of what other people would think of us too seriously by commenting on reactions as stereotypes at all. There's a stereotype for anything - I hadn't even heard the one of Irish people being passive before. I thought we were all too busy being mercurial and having red-haired tempers!

Spider Web

Samaris wrote: »

If there's no need for offence and there's no need for shrugging and commenting that he could have said worse if he wanted to get a rise out the Irish, what on earth -is- the allowable response?

Well any response is *allowed* but I thought I and others suggested somewhere in between?

I'd agree with taking the piss also though.

I think this may be veering away from my original point though, which was just that finding such a piece insulting (and no hysterics) is not the same as being ultra thin skinned.

Samaris

Ah, we can probably get together on yer man's a whingebag.

Emperor Qianlong

How do these articles get past an editor anyway?. Seen a lot of thinly veiled racist stuff get printed, then retracted.

Samaris

It's a good question and while I was amused at the magazine's comment about it, it didn't really face up to "why was this article even published". What new analysis or information did it add. What was its purpose bar to apparently insult people for really stupid reasons (as others have pointed out, those weren't even digs at the Irish people that meant anything; there's a lot worse to fling if he had made any effort at all).

Sure, they got traffic. They also got a lot of negative comment, a fair amount of slagging, lost a sponsor, are now risking being sued by another advertiser who never actually placed the ad they were running purporting to be from them, and apparently some industrious messer signed them up to the mailing list of every Irish porn and escort company in the country.

And few people are even offended; I think most of the reaction I've seen has been taking the piss out of him and the magazine both.

So...what was the point?

Emperor Qianlong

The author then wrote a sort of retraction apology, presumably under duress, where he had the temerity to claim to be Irish himself. The guy is clearly a clown of the first order

https://countrysquire.co.uk/2017/08/13/an-open-letter-of-apology-thanks/

I am writing this open letter to you all having sat for twenty four hours or so through the hundreds of right-to-replies the Editor of Country Squire Magazine insisted upon me reading.
Finally, I would like to apologise to the Irish. To confirm I have no problem with you whatsoever and I was shocked to see more than one man and his dog read my article, to be honest. When the Irish Ambassador passed comment on it, I was truly stunned. Please forgive me. I bear no ill will to you or your country. Nor to those of us who, like me, are of mixed Irish descent (Browne is an Irish name) who live full-time over here in England.

the 'Editor' should be getting the boot also for printing this bile

Samaris

Lol! I was wondering if they'd do something like that; the comment from the magazine invited people to go with the "right to reply" and it amuses me greatly that an editor presumably dumped the lot of them on Browne's desk and told him to get on with it.

pearcider

bmwguy wrote: »

I'm 100% Irish and I find this funny. I'm not outraged, angered, belittled or anything of the sort. And plenty of it is true.

Why do other demographics find everything written inflammatory and offensive? Even stuff way tamer than this.

And I guarantee you there will be no big fallout from this.

Totally agree with this. People will get offended over the smallest things these days. Sad world we live in when freedoms of speech is under attack constantly. I thought it was a great article! What a dangerous world this is becoming when I went to show it to people today and it had been scrubbed...Anyone know where I can get a copy?

Avatar MIA

Well, this escalated quickly!


BY JIM BROWNE

The opinion piece “Get Stuffed Eire” has been removed by the Uploader based on a request from the author and the editorial team. For Jim’s response to the criticism and praise he received for the article, please read here. Jim has resigned from the magazine forthwith and apologises for any upset the article may have caused.


Major change in tone from the defence of the 'right to free speech' line taken earlier.



Does anyone know if this is an online only magazine or does it also have a print version?



So, we've "lost" Meyers and they've lost Browne - an idiot for an idiot?

Avatar MIA

pearcider wrote: »

I thought it was a great article!

Why, given the clear factual errors?

Okay, it gave the Irish government a kicking, and that's always going to appeal to some.

Do you hate the government that much that you'd cut off your nose to spite your face?

pearcider

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Why, given the clear factual errors?

Okay, it gave the Irish government a kicking, and that's always going to appeal to some.

Do you hate the government that much that you'd cut off your nose to spite your face?

An article can read very well and be a little liberal with the truth. Okay so there was an error to two. That wouldn't bother me to be honest. It's not a peer reviewed scientific study. It was very entertaining and I love seeing a few sacred cows getting barbecued

gctest50

He did have a few good ideas from the UK pov. ( brexit )

* tempt Google and Apple to move (esp with Athrenry Apple objected to )

Double Irish ? Double English with extra toast k thx


* end free-travel Ireland--->UK ....... no visa, no entry to mainland UK

( makes it a handy way to send home the Irish convicted of crime )

.

Avatar MIA

gctest50 wrote: »

* tempt Google and Apple to move (esp with Athrenry Apple objected to )

And how does he suggest the same is achieved? By undercutting Ireland's tax policy, which he criticised Ireland for doing because we had to. You'd be tempted to think this was a Waterford Whispers moment, but sometimes bigots simply have tunnel vision.

gctest50

Avatar MIA wrote: »

...........

which he criticised Ireland for doing ...............

Who cares what he criticised, the idea is good





Other things they could be at :

Buy loads n loads of Irish farm produce ( cos it's good )

Buy less Irish tech stuff

Spider Web

Emperor Qianlong wrote: »

The author then wrote a sort of retraction apology, presumably under duress, where he had the temerity to claim to be Irish himself. The guy is clearly a clown of the first order

https://countrysquire.co.uk/2017/08/13/an-open-letter-of-apology-thanks/

I am writing this open letter to you all having sat for twenty four hours or so through the hundreds of right-to-replies the Editor of Country Squire Magazine insisted upon me reading.
Finally, I would like to apologise to the Irish. To confirm I have no problem with you whatsoever and I was shocked to see more than one man and his dog read my article, to be honest. When the Irish Ambassador passed comment on it, I was truly stunned. Please forgive me. I bear no ill will to you or your country. Nor to those of us who, like me, are of mixed Irish descent (Browne is an Irish name) who live full-time over here in England.

the 'Editor' should be getting the boot also for printing this bile

Fair play to him I think but it's weird of him to say he bears no ill will, seeing as the article says exactly the opposite.

pearcider wrote: »

Totally agree with this. People will get offended over the smallest things these days. Sad world we live in when freedoms of speech is under attack constantly. I thought it was a great article!

Assuming you're Irish, unfortunately quite a number of Irish people are quite happy to bend over and take being put down - even contributing to it. It's a pity. People do get offended over the smallest things, but a barrage of insults at 4.75 million people does not belong in the trivial category (even if it doesn't belong in the very serious category either). If it was jokey, it would be stupid to be insulted by it, but it was completely serious. I'm not sure what sacred cows it took aim at too. All looked very "soft target" to me.

Why do I think a number of people with the "get over it" outlook on this would not be saying similar if it was an attack on other nationalities.

Avatar MIA

gctest50 wrote: »

Who cares what he criticised, the idea is good

:rolleyes: Because that's a totally different debate. I'm sure there's a Brexit forum around here somewhere.

Emperor Qianlong

Brexit seems to be an opportunity for closet racists to have a good old rant. They are just waiting for someone to criticize their beloved Brexit and then have an excuse to launch a tirade of abuse at them, in this case at an entire nation.

pearcider

Spider Web wrote: »

Assuming you're Irish, unfortunately quite a number of Irish people are quite happy to bend over and take being put down - even contributing to it. It's a pity. People do get offended over the smallest things, but a barrage of insults at 4.75 million people does not belong in the trivial category (even if it doesn't belong in the very serious category either). If it was jokey, it would be stupid to be insulted by it, but it was completely serious. I'm not sure what sacred cows it took aim at too. All looked very "soft target" to me.

Why do I think a number of people with the "get over it" outlook on this would not be saying similar if it was an attack on other nationalities.

It's not about bending over and being put down. It's about having the self confidence to take a good slagging and not having it affect you in the slightest. I take issue with the fact the article has now been censored and I can't show it to other people. It's just another attack on freedom of speech by these so called liberals (who not unlike the communists of the late 19th century are actually control freaks) who control the media in the western world.

Barrage of insults? Please. It was a funny and welll written article. Get over it.

Spider Web

Yes, a barrage of insults. Not sure how it's funny. There was no humour intended - it wasn't satirical.

I agree it's a sign of self confidence to laugh at yourself in the context of a jokey put-down. Not to praise a serious put-down though - that's just self flagellating.

Nothing over-sensitive about people saying a bunch of insults thrown at them is uncalled for. That's still miles off being easily outraged, and many seem not willing or able to distinguish between the two. Not sure it would have been just liberals either who led the charge of the outcry (an outcry I saw no evidence of without looking for it, by the way) - usually liberals aren't bothered about western countries being slagged off.

Who says the removal of the article was about suppression of free speech too? Did people demand it be removed or were they just expressing their dislike of it?
(Which is also free speech). Seems more like the magazine wanted to protect its ad revenue and PR.

Technically, censorship of speech by a private enterprise is not suppression of free speech. Nobody has ever been able to broadcast and publish anything they like either, free speech isn't an accurate term. However it just feels like more gets removed now because of the way the internet allows us all to publish and broadcast, not just journalists.

Samaris

To be honest, it actually wasn't a very good article.


It had some amusing turns of phrase, but mostly it was a rather disjointed rant about a bunch of unconnected rubbish. It didn't take snipes at things that should be condemned, it didn't even have enough introspection to pick up on things that might rightly make the Irish feel like he had a point. It relied on rather tired old stereotypes. It had some funny moments, but mostly it wasn't really very well-written, it wasn't particularly clever (bar a couple of good phrases), it wasn't very convincing, hell, it was so over-the-top that people couldn't work out was it satire or serious, it added nothing new, it made no real analysis. It was a pretty pointless article apparently for the sake of stirring up outrage and gaining clicks. It was clickbait, not much more. I mean, if you have to resort to slagging off the dairy produce when there's all the actual scandals we've had, you're not exactly paying attention!

Let's not make it more than it was, it was no Modest Proposal. It was quite simply garbage. I've read better take-downs in single posts on Twitter, and that's with the character limit!

That's mostly why I can't really take it seriously.

pearcider

Well I thought it was hilarious. To take that article seriously you'd have to be one of these types who gets offended at everything. It's muppets like that who will lead us all into an Orwellian nightmare in the near future. Anyway...does anyone know where I can view the article online?

Samaris

pearcider wrote: »

Well I thought it was hilarious. To take that article seriously you'd have to be one of these types who gets offended at everything. It's muppets like that that will lead us into an Orwellian nightmare in the near future. Anyway...does anyone know where I can view the article online?

Try the internet wayback machine.

vicwatson

A 76 year old fart. He does have a daughter married to an "Eire" man from Galway though, so he's allowed say what he likes right?

Emperor Qianlong

pearcider wrote: »

Well I thought it was hilarious. To take that article seriously you'd have to be one of these types who gets offended at everything. It's muppets like that who will lead us all into an Orwellian nightmare in the near future. Anyway...does anyone know where I can view the article online?

Is your self esteem so low that you refuse to take offence to an article that is deliberately written to offend your entire nation?
Maybe we should start taking more offence to this type of stuff, been going on for long enough. As someone mentioned if it were aimed at any other group it would be considered criminal.

You remind me of the Irish lads back in the day who used to tell the Irish jokes. Completely unaware they were designed to make them look like ignorant paddys.