Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Danny Baker's..


Stouffer
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

But, if at the point of comparison, the person's race is unknown, then it is hard to define the act as one centring on race. I could call you an ape - I'm unaware of your race - is that immediately racist, or does it become retrospectively racist if you then tell me you're black?

Right. I find it hard to imagine he’s unaware of Meghan Markle’s ethnicity, but carry on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

But, if at the point of comparison, the person's race is unknown, then it is hard to define the act as one centring on race. I could call you an ape - I'm unaware of your race - is that immediately racist, or does it become retrospectively racist if you then tell me you're black?

How is their race unknown if there is an image of the person in question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

What if the person posting the image were unaware of the target's race?

 

What if the person posting was black?

 

Is it always defined as racist because of the image itself, with no regard for any other factors?

This post is dripping with despicable intention and racist undertones and I, for one, AM OUTRAGED.

 

This country.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to Baker, he’s made many a comment about monkeys and the royals. A bit of foresight would have benefitted, and he did apologise and take it down straight away. For the BBC to sack him and let Sugar keep his job despite being a massive racist himself and giving Farage the amount of air time they do, seems a bit fucking rich.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it completely incomprehensible that Danny Baker would deliberately tweet a picture of a monkey (ape) to allude to the child's race. That would imply he thought people would find that funny or amusing, or that no one would react. How could he possibly think he would get away with that and why would he want to?  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

With regards to Baker, he’s made many a comment about monkeys and the royals. A bit of foresight would have benefitted, and he did apologise and take it down straight away. For the BBC to sack him and let Sugar keep his job despite being a massive racist himself and giving Farage the amount of air time they do, seems a bit fucking rich.  

Not to mention having operated as some sort of nonce sanctuary throughout the 70s.

 

The BBC can fuck off.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, moof said:

Hypothetical? Why not deal with the reality? It was a racist tweet

Because, if you can't define why it's racist - much like Chomsky delving into the blanket statement of antisemitism and holocaust denial - then you're at best relying on half-baked logic, and at worst following a crowd because you're either unable or unwilling to analyse your own reactionary condemnation.

 

That's the point of hypotheticals in such instances.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

I ain’t the boss of you. 

 

 

Sorry my insensitive language has whipped some up, I was unaware of the connotations since I don’t have a diseased mind like the rest of you. Now I have removed the post me and my family would like some privacy, thank you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Because, if you can't define why it's racist - much like Chomsky delving into the blanket statement of antisemitism and holocaust denial - then you're at best relying on half-baked logic, and at worst following a crowd because you're either unable or unwilling to analyse your own reactionary condemnation.

 

That's the point of hypotheticals in such instances.

Comparing a black baby to a chimp is racist 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Whatever floats your boat fella. 

 

Intentions are irrelevent. It’s about the impact. He compared a baby of African heritage to a chimpanzee and when he was pulled up on it his defence was he didn’t notice because he doesn’t have a diseased mind. 

 

Thats racist. I’m terribly sorry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, moof said:

Whatever floats your boat fella. 

 

Intentions are irrelevent. It’s about the impact. He compared a baby of African heritage to a chimpanzee and when he was pulled up on it his defence was he didn’t notice because he doesn’t have a diseased mind. 

 

Thats racist. I’m terribly sorry

That's fine, sounds like you disagree with Chomsky about antisemitism too; many do, we can't all sing from the same hymn sheet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...