Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Lar Naparka

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 291
1
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All stars 2020
« on: January 15, 2021, 11:36:37 PM »
Leaving aside all the other arguments surrounding Dublin, would it really be too far to give them the full 15 all stars based on their champioship performances or maybe 14 out 15 all stars?
That's a reasonable suggestion but I don't think you could follows it thorough, based on this year's final. IN some cases, who'd get the award, the main who started or the sub who replaced him?

2
GAA Discussion / Re: Retirements
« on: January 15, 2021, 11:26:27 PM »
I hadn't expected Chris to go and I'm afraid Zippy could be next and Jason Doc could be considering his options and maybe Kevin Mac also.
I've spoken my mind about Brolly and I won't mention the little bollox again except to say that if you compared Brolly to a jackass it would be a deadly insult and an apology would be called for.
I mean jackasses do have their standards, ya know.
There may be others, apart from him whom I won't mention again who think players who haven't won AI medals should nog announce their retirements. That is to misunderstand the bond between Mao fans and their players. IMO, we couldn't think more of them if  had won 7 in a row, never mind 6.

Having gotten that off my chest, I can't help but wonder what James Horan is planning to do this year. No doubt he has a serious unit on his hands and going with youth is his best option.
Still, if he had introduced some of the boys of the old brigade instead of the placements he did send in against Dublin, they would have given a better account of themselves.
The result would probably have ben the same but the result would have ben closer, IMO, anyway.
However, that is alll yesterday's news. It will be interesting to see how things go in this years league.

3
General discussion / Re: Who’s Been Cancelled??
« on: January 15, 2021, 09:12:33 PM »
Lár na Páirce, a chara!

Do I agree with Sid?!  As you correctly state - sin ceist eile!  I do not agree that RTÉ should have had to issue an apology. If the sketch had been this weekend, after the Mother-and-Baby-Homes Report, I doubt if Archbishop Martin would have spoken on the matter at all.

We are an Irish-speaking family.  If we felt that you are mocking our language by bastardising the spelling of Lár na Páirce, would you feel a need to apologise for the hurt caused?!
M’anam ón diabhal, you had me worried afor a while but I had made that  clear from the start when I responded to sid and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.
The origin of my handle goes back to the day I was stuck in a pub watching a Railway Cup game on TV.
Mar is eol duit, the commentary was as Gaeilge.
The guy sitting beside me was one mean looking individual. Six feet plus and built like a tank, the tight crew cut was a giveaway. An American marine was my neighbour and I felt slightly uneasy in case he objected to my presence in any way. I had sat down before I noticed that there were empty seats on either side of him.
I felt unsettled by his presence as he sat there glued to the box. His expression never changed but I could see from his eye movements that he was following the game closely.
All the time, for the duration of the game, he did not utter a word, just signalled to the barman when he wanted a refill. The drink was neat whiskey and the refills came every ten minutes or so. Not a word all the while from mo dhuine.
I was relieved when the game ended and I went to stand up.
The yank beat me to it.
He stood up, polished off his last drink and turned to me, looking me straight in the eye.
“Friend, I don’t know what that game is about and I sure caan’t follow the lingo but I'll tell you what…”
He put down the glass and then said , “ there sure is one thing I do know and that Lar guy is one hell of a player.”
He could see that I couldn’t understand. I could sense he was a little bit annoyed so I wasn’t going to disagree with him.
“Oh, I see what you mean I said. Which Lar did you have in mind?”
He looked at me as if I was a born fool, which I felt I was and was feeling more so by each passing second.
“Which Lar,?”  sez he, “ there was only one standout player in that game and that was Lar Naparka.
Years later when I came across gaaboard, I had no problem cooking up with my handle.

4
General discussion / Re: Who’s Been Cancelled??
« on: January 15, 2021, 04:50:59 PM »
Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?
I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.
Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn’t!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can’t tell you ass from your elbow.
 
The fact that I don’t necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it’s only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don’t give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
“It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence”
Sez who?
Here’s a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I’ve been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who’d agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You’re a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)
You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line
sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,
I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems
Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!
Ní thuigim??
I understand what Sid is pontificating!!
You do??
Well, God between us and small farms, sid had found a kindred soul! Or has he? You may well understand what he is pontificating about but do you agree with him?
Sin ceist eile.
Remember my position is fairly simple.
The content of the sketch doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Its timing does and the fact that over 5,000 people went to the trouble of lodging an official complaint must count for something. At the time I replied to sid, he was the only dissenting voice II had come across.
The timing for me was designed to provoke controversy. To say it was broadcast late at night is only a fig leaf of an excuse. New Year’s Eve is a time for families to watch the fireworks etc. from around the world as the new year is ushered in.
That many more than the 5,00 who contacted RTE were offended is, IMO, undeniable. Nobody got in touch to back the decision o broadcast when the controversy unfolded, AFAIK. 
I pointed all this out to sid and here verbatim, is his exact reply.
“Isn't that the same logic that holds "what did Manuela Riedo expect to happen when she walked along that deserted path beside the railway line"?
The George Hook logic
Why were David Quinn and the I Own Her Institute all over #jesuischarlie and "free speech" in 2015?
And why are they the exact opposite now?
How the hell should I know or care?
 
I don’t particularly like George Hook, I respect the rights of David Quinn and his I Own Her (Iona?) Institute to say whatever they like but I am no fellow traveller and I had given no reason to declare that I was.
But associating me in any way with the poor girl who was raped and strangled as she walked home was grossly offensive.
In my opinion the #jesuischarlie craic was an exercise in futility  but, if anything, it was a massive response to what the supporters saw as an attack on the right to free speech.
That’s the side sid should support if there is any logic in what he said!”
Need I go on?
Which side are you on, by the way? Do you support the right of Mac Grianna & co. to freedom of speech and at the same time oppose the right of the #jesuischarlie brigade to exercise the same right?
 
Following my second post, sid came back with:
“I don't see a connection between Manuela Riedo's murder and the RTE sketch and already said so - so why are you saying I do? “
No, he hasn't said so- not by a country mile.  Maybe you can see some connection but I certainly cant.
How about this?
“Unprompted, seemingly from nowhere, you appeared to state that victims of assault bear some responsibility if they are assaulted - but they don't.
Do you do you think I said that?
I am inclined to rest my case and I'm stopping after only his second reply.
Maybe I should sign off with this from the pulpit stuff:
 
The self proclaimed Catholic religious right have styled themselves as so called "free speech warriors" - up to and including apologism for and outright defences of many things most reasonable people would consider hate speech - they seem to be just fine with abhorrent, extreme right-wing politics worldwide
 
Yet now they're up in arms over this sketch - which shows them up as total and utter hypocrites who do not believe a word they previously said
 
It shows them up as holding moronic opinions - they think it's fine to utter hate speech against others - but it's apparently off limits to legitimately satirise the Catholic right's religious beliefs?
 
IMO, that is take it or leave it, sid has spoken and he is infallible. Not a hint of an IMO or a reference to anything other than his imagination for his proclamations.
Now. if you agree with all of that, I have nothing more to say.

5
GAA Discussion / Re: Retirements
« on: January 15, 2021, 08:28:47 AM »
The oul’ memory iis a bit flaky, never was great at the best of times, and I don’t recall the game in which Mayo last beat Dublin very well. But, IIRC, Mayo had to dig in to hold on and just scraped it.
In the aftermath, Brolly cut loose and called Horan everything in a farmyard except a pet lamb. Mayo, sez he, were the most cynical team ever known to man. They were pulling and dragging off the ball, running across free takers and using just about every dark art in the Mayo ever since and he can got town at times. Allll reason is left behind when he writes  anything about Mayo.
Remember the end of the ‘16 final?
The little s.o.b has plenty to say about Lee Keegan trying to obstruct Dean Rock but sweet FA about Costello kicking the ball off David Clarke’s tee or the Dublin players dragging and obstructing the Mayo lads while waiting for Clarke’s kickout.
I don’t see any point in talking about the little bollox.
It’s none of his business if a Mayo player announces his retirement or not.  So he won no All Irelan medals? So what? It doesn’t mean a lot to most people outside of Mayo and hardly merits a mention in the national media but it is of interest to most Mayo folks and we don’t give two flying fucks about Brolly and his bile.

6
General discussion / Re: Who’s Been Cancelled??
« on: January 15, 2021, 12:36:53 AM »
Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?
I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.
Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn’t!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can’t tell you ass from your elbow.
 
The fact that I don’t necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it’s only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don’t give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
“It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence”
Sez who?
Here’s a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I’ve been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who’d agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You’re a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)
You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line
sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,
I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems
Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

Níor léigh tú an rud a scríobh mé, mar sin.

Sin mar atá an saol!!!
Ní thuigim??

7
General discussion / Re: Mother and Baby Home Report
« on: January 14, 2021, 11:49:15 AM »
My neighbours shut confined their pregnant, unmarried daughter to the house once she started to show.

Everyone knew anyway, even us kids!

And this was only the 80s as well.
if Ireland has embraced the Protestant religion way back when it would have made Irish history a lot less painful these types of crimes would never have happened or clerical abuse , the country would probably never have been   partitioned and all the troubles and violence that brought with it .
That’s very debatable.
As history evolved, there was the ruling class, the Ascendancy,  who were Anglican. almost without exception. This was the Established Church and had more power, rights and privileges. Tithes had to be paid by all non-Anglicans to support the Established Church. 
So if the poor Irish had turned to any of the Protestant churches, they wouldn’t be that much better off unless they tried to convert to Anglicism and you can bet your house on it that the Ascendancy would have nothing to do with them.
Converting to Presbyterianism was also a no-no as that’s the religion of the Ulster Scots and the native Irish are still brawling with that lot to the present day.
Above all else, France and Spain are Catholic countries and as they were enemies of England, the Catholic Irish couldn’t risk turning to anything else.

8
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: January 13, 2021, 10:17:42 PM »
Trump impeached for a 2nd time. History marker clown.
What really worries me is that millions of Americans apparently believe just about everything he says. I can't see him fading into the background or at the very least resuming his business activities. That man will continue causing trouble until American are prepared to face the realitymthan the Donald is deranged and in need f psychiatric help.

10
I am very proud that we didn't lose a championship match all year  ;D ;D.

Very disappointed in our Div 4 Performance - hopefully McEntee can get us out of that division

As someone with family in Sligo, I see that joke going around inside the county quite a bit. I find it embarrassing that ye would talk about yourselves like that. If you want to win you have to feel some hurt when you lose. Not taking a personal dig at you by the way.
They didn't lose ;)
True Ross, they didn't lose and they don't really laugh it off. I know a few Sligo people and they are as passionate about theiir time as any one in any other county. I think they have a self-deprecating sense of humour. (Like that?? ;D. TBH, I'm not sure I know what it means either but I just want to show off.)
They may make the odd joke about their team's lack of success but dare you or anybody else agree with them.
What about your own lads?
I imagine staying in Div ! will be the priority and a shot at a Connacht title a distinct possibility.

11
General discussion / Re: Mother and Baby Home Report
« on: January 13, 2021, 09:08:52 PM »
What sort of society was it to produce such sadistic nuns?

A lot of people were pushed into it .....very religious parents conned them into thinking they had a “vocation”-ie an imaginary person with super powers whispering you to do it

I know one family that had 6 daughters-5 became nuns (and then all subsequently quit)

Can you imagine the frustration and resentment that fostered in those young women. Quitting religious orders was yet another embarrassment for the family that was to be avoided at all cost
Yer dead right all the way…...
But many parents acted for practical reasons too. I had a teaching colleague once who was a headcase if I ever met one.
Seems his mother called him aside one day when he was fifteen or so and told him, “John is the oldest so he will get the farm. Michaely will be sent to university and you , me bucko, will be a christain brother. At least you'll get three square meals a day and a roof over your head.”
Yer man tried to protest but she shut him up. Yer bags are packed and the hackney car will be here in a half hour.”
So my mate wound up in the brothers and he hated being there. After a few years of pure hello, he finally decided to quit. His superiors treated him like a leper.
He was sent to his room to pray and make atonement for hios sins. When all others had retired for the night, he was summoned downstairs where his bags were packed , he got a train ticket to his hometown and was told never to darken the door again.
He was already a qualified primary teacher so he took up a teaching job and he completely overreacted when he was free of the brothers’ regime.
He told me most of the brothers had no religious vocations, it was either the brothers or the boat. Times were hard and parents were hard-headed.
I don't know a lot about nuns in general but from some I used to know I was told that not every girl wound up in convents because they wanted to be there. Either their parents forced them to join or some fella had let them down. In other words, genuine, holy Mary nuns were as scarce as hen’s teeth.
No wonder their nickname was mickey dodgers.
Bonking was always an Irish national pastime and as there was very little money floating about, the number of illegitimate kids had to be kept as low as possible. But since incest was also a national pastime, many innocent girls were raped by their fatheres or brothers or some near relative.
From what I was told, houses were small, often only two bedrooms, so the growing boys and girls had to share a small cramped room with only a blanket screen to separate the sexes and you know the rest….
Since out of wedlock births were considered occasions of sin and girls who got pregnant had to be kept out of sight so off to the nunnery in the Morris Minor was the only way to go
Some families did not bend to the tune of Catholic Church and supported their daughters by raising the new arrival as a late child, not a grandchild.   Some families had much more integrity than the Bishops.

A National Pastime?  Not the description I would choose.
I understand what you ar saying but the truth needs to be told. I had a number of uncles ho were born around the turn of the century  and at different times I discussed their growing up experiences with each of them.
There was a remarkable unanimity of opinion when it came to illegitimate births and the sexual practices of their times. Maybe covert sexual practices would describe the experiences more accurately. My father in law was a younger man but his account of growing up in rural Cavan was very similar.
There was absolutely no sex education of any sort. The subject was taboo so children had to try and understand their growling sexual feelings  without any clear instruction on what was happening to their bodies and minds.
Bear in mind that the number of pregnant girls who were pushed into Mother and Baby homes do not reflect the actual number of out of wedlock pregnancies.
Probably as many more were shipped doff to England. Liverpool in particular seemed the place the greatest number were sent to.
Others simply had abortions whether they liked it or not.
The stats just released are horrifying but they don't tell the full story- not by a long shot.

12
General discussion / Re: Mother and Baby Home Report
« on: January 13, 2021, 06:36:45 PM »
What sort of society was it to produce such sadistic nuns?

A lot of people were pushed into it .....very religious parents conned them into thinking they had a “vocation”-ie an imaginary person with super powers whispering you to do it

I know one family that had 6 daughters-5 became nuns (and then all subsequently quit)

Can you imagine the frustration and resentment that fostered in those young women. Quitting religious orders was yet another embarrassment for the family that was to be avoided at all cost
Yer dead right all the way…...
But many parents acted for practical reasons too. I had a teaching colleague once who was a headcase if I ever met one.
Seems his mother called him aside one day when he was fifteen or so and told him, “John is the oldest so he will get the farm. Michaely will be sent to university and you , me bucko, will be a christain brother. At least you'll get three square meals a day and a roof over your head.”
Yer man tried to protest but she shut him up. Yer bags are packed and the hackney car will be here in a half hour.”
So my mate wound up in the brothers and he hated being there. After a few years of pure hello, he finally decided to quit. His superiors treated him like a leper.
He was sent to his room to pray and make atonement for hios sins. When all others had retired for the night, he was summoned downstairs where his bags were packed , he got a train ticket to his hometown and was told never to darken the door again.
He was already a qualified primary teacher so he took up a teaching job and he completely overreacted when he was free of the brothers’ regime.
He told me most of the brothers had no religious vocations, it was either the brothers or the boat. Times were hard and parents were hard-headed.
I don't know a lot about nuns in general but from some I used to know I was told that not every girl wound up in convents because they wanted to be there. Either their parents forced them to join or some fella had let them down. In other words, genuine, holy Mary nuns were as scarce as hen’s teeth.
No wonder their nickname was mickey dodgers.
Bonking was always an Irish national pastime and as there was very little money floating about, the number of illegitimate kids had to be kept as low as possible. But since incest was also a national pastime, many innocent girls were raped by their fatheres or brothers or some near relative.
From what I was told, houses were small, often only two bedrooms, so the growing boys and girls had to share a small cramped room with only a blanket screen to separate the sexes and you know the rest….
Since out of wedlock births were considered occasions of sin and girls who got pregnant had to be kept out of sight so off to the nunnery in the Morris Minor was the only way to go

13
GAA Discussion / Re: Money, Dublin and the GAA
« on: January 13, 2021, 10:13:36 AM »
Angelo has a very similar tone to Dublin's favorite Journalist Ewan McKenna, including personal insults.

Good on the lads getting cushy numbers, Jesus if only i could, they should enjoy it, best years of their lives, plenty of time after their careers are finished.

GAABoard Dublin fairness rule no 136: All Dublin players must work in a coal mine, 6 days a week, 12 hours a day. Underage development squads not excluded.
For my two cents worth, I have no problem with players, any players, making a few bob on the side. What they do off the field is their business. I have lots of reservations about Dublin football in general but what the players do in their private lives is not one of them.

14
General discussion / Re: Who’s Been Cancelled??
« on: January 12, 2021, 10:25:32 PM »
Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?
I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.
Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn’t!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can’t tell you ass from your elbow.
 
The fact that I don’t necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it’s only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don’t give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
“It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence”
Sez who?
Here’s a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I’ve been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who’d agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You’re a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)
You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line
sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,
I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems
Sincere thanks for your good wishes, sid.
However, life is too short to waste any more of it going over the same ground again and again.
Don't forget that if you can get even one half sane individual who is willing to swear that he understand what you are on about,  I wikll admit defeat gracefully.

15
General discussion / Re: Who’s Been Cancelled??
« on: January 12, 2021, 10:19:54 PM »
Lar best wishes on the health front.
Thanks Ross. I appreciate all the sympathy I can get nowadays.
With regard to the subject in hand, I’d like to move on to hopefully better things.
I have no strong feelings, one way or the other, about Angus Mac Grianna, Waterford Whispers or the tenets of the Holy Rooman Catholc Church.
Live and let live could be my motto.
My main gripe is that no advance warning appears to have been given that the sketch contained material that might be offensive to some and that viewer discretion was advised.
I accept this it is parents’ responsibility to oversee what their children should be allowed to watch but, AFAIK, no such advance notice was given. Had this been done, I doubt that I would have spent the last few days trying to play handball against a haystack. ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 291