Are you seriously trying to defend it because he's "old"? If anything the proverbial hammer should come down harder for that fact.
Explain: "to compliment Lukaku he used a metaphor that turned out to be racist"
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
Are you seriously trying to defend it because he's "old"? If anything the proverbial hammer should come down harder for that fact.
It's not "lynch them all" mob mentality, no. It is a malicious stereotype rooted in the superiority of the ignorant.
^ no biggie?
It was the way back then and should simply be dismissed as such, them oldies and their Jimmy Savile's...
Seriously? You actually trying to defend the guy? To be honest my version ending with "for a black man" was a hundred times better than his slur about monkeys.
Times do change.
When the age of consent changed from 13 to 16 would have put everyone in jail by retroactively applying the new AOC to the times before the change? I'm sure you wouldn't. I dare say you would feel that an injustice had been righted, but would acknowledge that the past had to be viewed in terms of what was acceptable at the time.
Society has changed. Laws have changed. The reality of being x,y,z in this country has changed.
The chap lost his job and should probably have been enjoying his retirement already by this point! Through the modern lens of societal norms what he said was unwanted and he has been removed. I wouldn't find it odd if someone had been offended. It's widely understood that monkey jokes aren't banter and are dehumanising/derogatory.
That won't stop him from being remembered fondly by probably his many friends at the station. Won't hopefully lead to him being shunned in his community or hounded by some woke Anti-fa thugs.
He is a product of his times, and like it or not, you won't change an 80 year old. At some point your ideals have to meet reality.
However hard you'd like to have punished him I think you're driven by some kind of ideological zealotry which I don't think is healthy.
You literally did not have to write that, he's been fired and that's as far as it should go when it comes to action, but to try to defend him on grounds of "different" era, when he knows FINE WELL modern proclivities, is seriously reaching for apologism. People can understand that he might be unable to amend his thoughts on the matter (being old), but this changes nothing realistically, understanding something is not accepting something.
It's been acted upon, and that's the end of it for any rational actor.
You're lying again.
You musy know that your position is baseless. Why else would you keep making things up and falsely claiming this person said them?
utter rubbish. Nobody on here is baying for him to be punished further, he lost hsi job, thats enough.,
But people are commenting on posts like yours where you are defending him and suggesting we should just brush it off cause he's 80. Suppose you would feel the same if he had said "i do like my girls young, pre pubescent" on the grounds that he comes from a different era and you just have to accept he won't change his ways?
Of course he's not going to change his ways at his age but that doesnt mean to say he should be employed on the radio/tv saying them.
I'm not defending it. I'm criticising a dishonest and hysterical reaction to it.
I was responding to you saying "the hammer should have come down harder".
Did you not mean what you wrote?
Sending very mixed messages here. You want to punish him more for something you've just said he can't amend? Interesting.
Anyway good luck with your campaign to make the over-75s woke
My position is baseless? Please do tell me what you think he meant by "giving him 10 bananas to eat" then? You going to claim it has nothing to do with the connection of monkeys and black people?
Yeah you're doing exactly what @Angillion said. And you do in most of your posts. Arguing against the voices in your head rather than what the people are actually posting.
Good luck with that.
Please explain then. I have stated that he has been sacked and thats punishment enough. Myself and lots of other people think what he said was racist. You and Angillion are both defending it on the basis he is old.,
Please tell me which bits I have got wrong and I am "talking to the voices in mind head"?
Its like the whole country has been rewound back to some god awful 70s sitcom.
The parts that you keep claiming he said that he didn't say. Either you're delusional enough to be hearing voices in your head or you're lying.
For one I didn't argue that he shouldn't have been dismissed.
You then said I thought it should be shrugged off and no action taken. This is clearly not what I said.
I was in particular responding to Strider who is flip flopping between saying the punishment should be more harsh for old people and in the next breath saying that he didn't believe that at all.
But then I've given up expecting consistency here. Or reading comprehension. Half the time people are just responding to what they hoped was said, or what they feel they can rebuke with least effort.