FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Ronald Dahl Censored

Ronald Dahl Censored

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

Reports that woke censors are trying to airbrush history by changing the language in Dahl's books. Words like fat are being taken out and even a reference to pink skin. These lunatics have not only taken over the adylum they are building more. Giant Peach and Willy Wonka are all affected. The jackboot of the left is all over this and it's all over the news too

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iltsTSgirlTV/TS over a year ago

chichester

Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hrista BellendWoman over a year ago

surrounded by twinkly lights

They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

nothing is going to change. It's all nonsensical bluster

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

This. Philip Pullman was right in this regard. If Roald Dahl is deemed so unacceptable to modern children with his dated and sometimes crude language, then let him run out of print and allow the new generation of children authors to take the spotlight with their era-appropriate work.

At this point I'm not even surprised anymore about how the woke left tries to defend it with whatever reason they can come up with. Gaby Hinsliff made a dogs' dinner of a defence in her Graun column by claiming that the censoring and rewriting of Roald Dahl's works made logical sense from a business perspective of Puffin (who owns the rights to the books, and don't want to get cancelled for selling them). I guess this is what living in a postmodernist era looks like: facts are no longer sacred, and feelings matter more than anything else.

Is it a fact that some of Dahl's language in his childrens' books has not aged well? Certainly. Does it warrant heavy-handed rewriting by sensitivity censors hired to protect corporate interests owning their IP rights? Absolutely not. Have children been clamouring for Roald Dahl's books to be edited with bits written out or replaced by "milder" modern-accepted words? I dare anybody to show evidence of such a demand that isn't simply driven by adults having softer tolerances for denigrating language than the children they claim to be protecting from bad historical influences and facts.

I do not envy the children of today. We're raising progressive generations of children with less and less of a childhood worth remembering or having.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman over a year ago

Paradise, Herts

Hope they change BFG. It’s bloody nonsense! Can’t believe that’s a kids book when they’re trying to learn to read properly

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Once you start rewriting history where does it stop. If something isn't acceptable in this day and age, then use it as a way of teaching people not silencing them. You can say the same thing about Disney movies, beloved by children from every generation but that shit is dark.

Leave it be.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *UGGYBEAR2015Man over a year ago

BRIDPORT

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman over a year ago

Paradise, Herts

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it. "

Don’t be silly. That’s too sensible and logical for this country

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

They will rewrite Shakespeare's books soon. All that violence, suicide and anti semitism.

Why do these buggers not rewrite the Bible ... ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ora the explorerWoman over a year ago

Paradise, Herts

"They will rewrite Shakespeare's books soon. All that violence, suicide and anti semitism.

Why do these buggers not rewrite the Bible ... ? "

They aren’t they? Isn’t God now a they?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Guessing Ronald Dahl is Roald Dahl's younger brother

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

"Reports that woke censors are trying to airbrush history by changing the language in Dahl's books. Words like fat are being taken out and even a reference to pink skin. These lunatics have not only taken over the adylum they are building more. Giant Peach and Willy Wonka are all affected. The jackboot of the left is all over this and it's all over the news too"

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

These woke leftist loons choose their targets. They will not attack the Bible yet as it is an attack on the monarchy they loathe but when the time is right they will. King James spent many years writing the Bible which is probably why they hate it so much..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iltsTSgirlTV/TS over a year ago

chichester

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it. "

That’s if they want to make money yes but if it’s an ethics choice. Personally be simpler to just put a warning label on covers that the book contains outdated terms some may find offensive.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I lmao when they changed ‘fat’ for ‘enormous’. That’s so much better…..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iltsTSgirlTV/TS over a year ago

chichester

"These woke leftist loons choose their targets. They will not attack the Bible yet as it is an attack on the monarchy they loathe but when the time is right they will. King James spent many years writing the Bible which is probably why they hate it so much.."

The bible problem is no one has really translated it correctly over the centuries and it’s been bastardised from old to new / with more relevant aspects focussed and adjusted to suit needs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *olden PoleMan over a year ago

Kent

So it’s all about protecting todays children against inappropriate words in a book for children is it? Doesn’t the problem lay deeper than the words of insignificant meaning such as “pink” or “fat” when the computer games they play are blood thirsty, brain washing lunacy. Take a look whilst out and about a see how many pre teen boys now walk about with these track suit bottoms half way down their arse and one hand down their front, the typical posturing of I’m armed - kids for god sake gesturing they are armed, and people are worried about words in a children book. Listen to the language used by todays youth, fuelled by social media they exist in a fantasy gang culture that quickly becomes a nightmare reality when a stabbing occurs and a young life lost. Children books are not the problem, the problem is access to ultra violence and the need to gain street status is a society that has no respect for life…..I think we are way beyond books here.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it.

That’s if they want to make money yes but if it’s an ethics choice. Personally be simpler to just put a warning label on covers that the book contains outdated terms some may find offensive. "

Warning. This book contains the word, Fat. Snowflakes may melt reading it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *assy69Man over a year ago

West Sussex and Wales

Am wrapping my Roald Dahl collection of books up and storing them somewhere safe before they get taken away

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it."

Oh definitely. But seems a lot of angst for what appears to be half a dozen words being changed in some kids books. They don't affect the plot, the messages, the characters or anything really, after all.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *stoppMan over a year ago

Durham

Changing a few words will be just the start, give it a few years they will ban them for not including genders beyond male and female.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

AHA, but it goes the other way too isn't it?

If it doesn't affect the plot, messages, or characters, why change them for the sake of changing them to look woke and "updated for modern sensibilities"?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"So it’s all about protecting todays children against inappropriate words in a book for children is it? Doesn’t the problem lay deeper than the words of insignificant meaning such as “pink” or “fat” when the computer games they play are blood thirsty, brain washing lunacy. Take a look whilst out and about a see how many pre teen boys now walk about with these track suit bottoms half way down their arse and one hand down their front, the typical posturing of I’m armed - kids for god sake gesturing they are armed, and people are worried about words in a children book. Listen to the language used by todays youth, fuelled by social media they exist in a fantasy gang culture that quickly becomes a nightmare reality when a stabbing occurs and a young life lost. Children books are not the problem, the problem is access to ultra violence and the need to gain street status is a society that has no respect for life…..I think we are way beyond books here."

This.

How many kids nowadays even read Roald Dahl anymore? Let's be bloody honest.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

These books were Written by Dahl. If Tom's books are altered by these lefty fascists for their new world order then Tom would turn in his grave if he were dead. What next. Paint the nudity ouf of Davinci paintings in case it offends?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *pank the MonkeyCouple over a year ago

Down the Rabbit Hole and Round the Corner

The whole thing is ridiculous. The books where written in there time. Imagine trying to rewrite Dickens!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *PLmale33Man over a year ago

Liverpool

Work in the industry and I assure you that we all think that the publishers and the Roald Dahl estate have made a grave error...

At the very most, they could have just put a disclaimer at the start saying it uses historic language but kept it to preserve the text

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

AHA, but it goes the other way too isn't it?

If it doesn't affect the plot, messages, or characters, why change them for the sake of changing them to look woke and "updated for modern sensibilities"? "

Exactly it's an endless cycle, an ever turning wheel with each side taking its turn to spin it.

People got worked up enough to want it changed. People get worked up because it's getting changed.

Both as "better things to be offended about" worthy as each other.

It is the petty little things that get people riled up more than big cataclysmic world changing things.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Can we not use them to educate rather than sanitise everything? How can our children and future generations formulate their own opinions if we take anything challenging away and wrap them up in cotton wool.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

AHA, but it goes the other way too isn't it?

If it doesn't affect the plot, messages, or characters, why change them for the sake of changing them to look woke and "updated for modern sensibilities"? "

Ah - the 'woke' word appears.

Knew it would. If only people knew just how often books, TV programs, movies, songs etc were adjusted, edited and altered over the years, for all manner of reasons.

Their heads might actually explode.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

It's interesting that this is woke censorship when the decision gas been made collectively by those in charge of Dahl's estate, the publishers and Netflix to try and ensure the latest versions of these increasingly outdated books are saleable now that Netflix are going to be adapting more and more of the stories.

It's less about "woke censorship" and more about keeping the cash cow alive

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

Also, the people angriest about this doappear oblivious to the fact that this is nothing new or radical in the world of publishing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They've changed a couple of words in some books Tom. Not rewritten them, changed the storyline or made major character changes.

Why are some people so triggered by the slightest things?

*ad I don't mean those that decided on the changes.........

But that works both ways, it's a human trait. Both sides are guilty as fucking sin for it.

Surely there's better things to be offended by?

AHA, but it goes the other way too isn't it?

If it doesn't affect the plot, messages, or characters, why change them for the sake of changing them to look woke and "updated for modern sensibilities"?

Ah - the 'woke' word appears.

Knew it would. If only people knew just how often books, TV programs, movies, songs etc were adjusted, edited and altered over the years, for all manner of reasons.

Their heads might actually explode.

And that's why I always say like many others than when it comes to media, a lot of times the classics always beat the remakes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Also, the people angriest about this doappear oblivious to the fact that this is nothing new or radical in the world of publishing"

It's sort of ironic that those having a hissy fit about this don't appear to even know that..

Even more so that if they did, they now use 'new' phrases to express their angst..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

You do know what age group Dahl's books are aimed at?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"Also, the people angriest about this doappear oblivious to the fact that this is nothing new or radical in the world of publishing

It's sort of ironic that those having a hissy fit about this don't appear to even know that..

Even more so that if they did, they now use 'new' phrases to express their angst..

You mean the repeated use of words like woke and snowflake from people protesting language should never evolve and stay exactly as it was 50+ years ago?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's interesting that this is woke censorship when the decision gas been made collectively by those in charge of Dahl's estate, the publishers and Netflix to try and ensure the latest versions of these increasingly outdated books are saleable now that Netflix are going to be adapting more and more of the stories.

It's less about "woke censorship" and more about keeping the cash cow alive"

Yup.

Corporate interests acting in corporate interest. Grab your pitchforks. Call the army. It's not allowed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. "
you can't change history

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Also, the people angriest about this doappear oblivious to the fact that this is nothing new or radical in the world of publishing

It's sort of ironic that those having a hissy fit about this don't appear to even know that..

Even more so that if they did, they now use 'new' phrases to express their angst..

You mean the repeated use of words like woke and snowflake from people protesting language should never evolve and stay exactly as it was 50+ years ago?"

And references to a Bible written 600 years ago but missing the fact that the language of then has been much changed therein but the message remains the same..

Ps. Not written by said royal person..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

We talking Ronald McDonald's brother?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

It's less about "woke censorship" and more about keeping the cash cow alive

Yup.

Corporate interests acting in corporate interest. Grab your pitchforks. Call the army. It's not allowed."

Wooden pitchforks?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

That's adorably naive.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple over a year ago

Wallasey

If you don't like something then don't engage with it. Don't read, listen to or watch things you may be offended by.

But don't censor things, what next book burnings....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"If you don't like something then don't engage with it. Don't read, listen to or watch things you may be offended by.

But don't censor things, what next book burnings...."

Wouldn't censorship in this case be the removal of the paragraphs that refer to the fat/large kid?

Which they haven't done..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It’s all a little silly….. but not as silly as the complete overreaction. They’re kids books and kids won’t care. If the changes offend you so much just buy a collection today, in the original language, there are millions in circulation.

Peace and love, peace and love.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

How on earth is editing a book and removing a few adjectives "changing history"?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If you don't like something then don't engage with it. Don't read, listen to or watch things you may be offended by.

But don't censor things, what next book burnings....

Wouldn't censorship in this case be the removal of the paragraphs that refer to the fat/large kid?

Which they haven't done.."

No what the Puffin censors have done is make a half assed hash of it.

I'm sure going by their logic, children in playgrounds today would be fine being called ENORMOUS by other kids and not just "fat".

If I want to adhere to such woke logic, you couldn't have asked for a worse word to describe "fat".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

In my opinion this is nonsensical.

What next ? Airbrushing classic works of art because they don’t ‘comply’ with the current climate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hilloutMan over a year ago

All over the place! Northwesr, , Southwest

These "activists" are cultural nihilists. They seek to subdue, coerce, co-opt, censor, cancel or outright destroy any work they deem unworthy of meeting their standards and are at odds with their ideology.

It's impossible to appease them without capitulation to their every demand. They don't create any original work but seek instead to change what's come before. Most of them are talentless, ideological zealots.

The recent campaign to cancel Hogwats Legacy is a perfect example of the current culture war. Its absolute failure was especially satisfying to observe.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It’s all a little silly….. but not as silly as the complete overreaction. They’re kids books and kids won’t care. If the changes offend you so much just buy a collection today, in the original language, there are millions in circulation.

Peace and love, peace and love. "

Peace and love are great, but outrage suits the requirements of certain media outlets more

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wingin CatMan over a year ago

London

Rumour has it that "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is being renamed to "Charles and His Anal Sex Adventures".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

"Also, the people angriest about this doappear oblivious to the fact that this is nothing new or radical in the world of publishing

It's sort of ironic that those having a hissy fit about this don't appear to even know that..

Even more so that if they did, they now use 'new' phrases to express their angst..

You mean the repeated use of words like woke and snowflake from people protesting language should never evolve and stay exactly as it was 50+ years ago?"

Exactly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Rumour has it that "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is being renamed to "Charles and His Anal Sex Adventures".

I don't think it's about anal, but try My Uncle Oswald. It's a sex book. By Roald Dahl

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wingin CatMan over a year ago

London

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it.

That’s if they want to make money yes but if it’s an ethics choice. Personally be simpler to just put a warning label on covers that the book contains outdated terms some may find offensive.

Warning. This book contains the word, Fat. Snowflakes may melt reading it "

The biggest snowflakes are the ones whinging about it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rumour has it that "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is being renamed to "Charles and His Anal Sex Adventures".

Rumour has it "Going Solo" is to be pulled from circulation because it depicts Roald Dahl describing his life in British East Africa with black African servants.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Just easier to let a book run out print if it’s deemed not acceptable by todays standards. Rather than change an authors work.

Or better still carry on offering it for sale and let individuals decide for themselves if they wish to buy it.

That’s if they want to make money yes but if it’s an ethics choice. Personally be simpler to just put a warning label on covers that the book contains outdated terms some may find offensive.

Warning. This book contains the word, Fat. Snowflakes may melt reading it

The biggest snowflakes are the ones whinging about it."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

That's adorably naive."
lol hardly nieve history is history, oh we'll just rewrite it so nobody will notice how it was anymore, you can change then you can only change now, is it for the better who knows

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

That's adorably naive.lol hardly nieve history is history, oh we'll just rewrite it so nobody will notice how it was anymore, you can change then you can only change now, is it for the better who knows

"
can't change then

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aughtycouple1008Couple over a year ago

west london

[Removed by poster at 23/02/23 10:31:30]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"These "activists" are cultural nihilists. They seek to subdue, coerce, co-opt, censor, cancel or outright destroy any work they deem unworthy of meeting their standards and are at odds with their ideology.

The recent campaign to cancel Hogwats Legacy is a perfect example of the current culture war. Its absolute failure was especially satisfying to observe. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Its all about censorship. A group of people have decided that some words are offensive and so must be changed regardless of how anyone else feels about it.

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

Him and his books are the product of their time and should be repected as such. A simple disclaimer at the beginning or on the cover should be all that is required when dealing with older material. Not changing it in any way.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

For example, the study of ancient history didn't generally involve women until the 1960s. Disgusting woke revisionists imposed women on Caesar and Pericles. Obviously they didn't exist, because history before then didn't include them...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

The fat controller will be next

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *PLmale33Man over a year ago

Liverpool

"The fat controller will be next"

Think it already has matey

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wingin CatMan over a year ago

London

Not all of us woke lefties are that bad. It's just the extremist element amongst them who try to give the rest of us a bad name.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The fat controller will be next

Think it already has matey"

No one is safe from cancel culture

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Not all of us woke lefties are that bad. It's just the extremist element amongst them who try to give the rest of us a bad name."

Tbh I just see these labels as meaningless soundbites. A bit like telling a fellow kid they have cooties.

It is useful to push what's deemed compromise further to your side though. Don't like something? Scream woke.

Or just ignore the frothing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Its all about censorship. A group of people have decided that some words are offensive and so must be changed regardless of how anyone else feels about it.

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple over a year ago

Wallasey

"If you don't like something then don't engage with it. Don't read, listen to or watch things you may be offended by.

But don't censor things, what next book burnings....

Wouldn't censorship in this case be the removal of the paragraphs that refer to the fat/large kid?

Which they haven't done.."
I never said they had done so I was measly saying I don't agree with censorship in general.

Think as individuals we are capable of self censorship, that's all x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple over a year ago

Wallasey

"Its all about censorship. A group of people have decided that some words are offensive and so must be changed regardless of how anyone else feels about it.

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

"
lol women were just as important then as they are now, its just they've thrust themselves into the limelight mind you the arabic nations still seem to have them subdued

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *.T.Man over a year ago

Belfast

For us to recognise how far we have come as a society and identify how far we have to go, we need yardsticks.

There are many things from the past that rightly deserve to remain there (Bernard Manning, Mind Your Language, The Carry On Films, Conversion Therapy etc), however to airbrush them out of existence denies the opportunity for critical analysis and discussion.

There are things now which are socially acceptable that weren't previously, and things that were which aren't now. Unless we understand where we were, how do we know where we are now?

I don't know if the publisher will retain the "classic" and "updated" versions, but it would make sense to offer people a choice? Read it as Dahl intended it to be read or read it in an updated format.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"If you don't like something then don't engage with it. Don't read, listen to or watch things you may be offended by.

But don't censor things, what next book burnings....

Wouldn't censorship in this case be the removal of the paragraphs that refer to the fat/large kid?

Which they haven't done.. I never said they had done so I was measly saying I don't agree with censorship in general.

Think as individuals we are capable of self censorship, that's all x"

Certainly agree with the latter..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

“There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity”, he said. “I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wingin CatMan over a year ago

London

" Don't like something? Scream woke.

Or just ignore the frothing."

Exactly my point!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

lol women were just as important then as they are now, its just they've thrust themselves into the limelight mind you the arabic nations still seem to have them subdued

But you said history is unchanged. Go find a history written before the 1960s. Almost no women.

Obviously women didn't exist, because history is the past and it can't be changed. Yes? That does seem to be what you're saying.

Maybe the ancients knew how to solve the abortion debate. Having kids without women existing. A miracle

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

[Removed by poster at 23/02/23 10:58:18]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eard and BoobsCouple over a year ago

Portstewart

Censorship of books and films and art made in the past should just have a little sticker on them saying made in a time when thinks we're different so just enjoy for what it is and stop trying to change the contents

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

People are going to lose their shit when they find out that in the original 1964 version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory the oompah loompas were actually imported African pygmy s1aves and this was changed in the film version back in 1971 because it was considered offensive and the books subsequently edited to match the film.

Woke snowflakes apoear to have existed 50 years ago!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"People are going to lose their shit when they find out that in the original 1964 version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory the oompah loompas were actually imported African pygmy s1aves and this was changed in the film version back in 1971 because it was considered offensive and the books subsequently edited to match the film.

Woke snowflakes apoear to have existed 50 years ago!"

Editing of books has pretty much always been a thing.

Outrage porn for the far right, less so.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

We should revert back to umpa lumpas being African pygmies smuggled out of Africa.

Mixed views here.

Did RD have a lot of fat adjectives. Yes. Does the story change much if some are removed ? No. So why the big outcry?

I lean to small re-editing as I see little harm. And it probably makes sense to be aware that kids view the world differently.

Eg Joey.

I do find it funny that it's very important to allow kids to read about people being described as fat... But also we should protect them from the idea that not all relationships are between a man and women.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple over a year ago

Wallasey

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

lol women were just as important then as they are now, its just they've thrust themselves into the limelight mind you the arabic nations still seem to have them subdued

But you said history is unchanged. Go find a history written before the 1960s. Almost no women.

Obviously women didn't exist, because history is the past and it can't be changed. Yes? That does seem to be what you're saying.

Maybe the ancients knew how to solve the abortion debate. Having kids without women existing. A miracle "
There are lots of important woman throughout history. Lots of powerful females, who brought about change and influenced the world around them x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

lol women were just as important then as they are now, its just they've thrust themselves into the limelight mind you the arabic nations still seem to have them subdued

But you said history is unchanged. Go find a history written before the 1960s. Almost no women.

Obviously women didn't exist, because history is the past and it can't be changed. Yes? That does seem to be what you're saying.

Maybe the ancients knew how to solve the abortion debate. Having kids without women existing. A miracle "
lol i think women have acquired the power now so men will be phased out

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'm alright with children being taught that not all relationships are between a man and woman. Just as I am teaching them that marriage does not define relationships.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"They are trying to make classical work, up to date for the world we live in now. Many others will follow this, what was acceptable 50 years ago may not be acceptable today. you can't change history

I mean yes, that's what happens, people rewrite history.

History is the study of the past, not the past itself.

The evidence of the past depends on what was preserved at the time, and the way in which it is written about now depends on the interpretation of contemporary writers.

lol women were just as important then as they are now, its just they've thrust themselves into the limelight mind you the arabic nations still seem to have them subdued

But you said history is unchanged. Go find a history written before the 1960s. Almost no women.

Obviously women didn't exist, because history is the past and it can't be changed. Yes? That does seem to be what you're saying.

Maybe the ancients knew how to solve the abortion debate. Having kids without women existing. A miracle There are lots of important woman throughout history. Lots of powerful females, who brought about change and influenced the world around them x"

The specific study of women in history became a thing approximately in the 1960s. Before this, mention of them was very rare.

I'm being sarcastic - pointing out how silly the claim is that you can't change history. People do it every single day. (In fact the study of the change in history is its own field - historical reception)

You can't change the past, but the past and history are not the same thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bi HaiveMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Cheeseville, Somerset

Woke snowflakes apoear to have existed 50 years ago!"

Sadly I think there are still some that say it should never have been changed as once written it should never be changed.

Like the 2nd amendment in America.....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

I think his anti-Semitism is well established and you dont have to Google much to find references of racism and mysogeny either but as I said, he is a product of his time and so are the stories he tells. they shouldn't be censored because they are uncomfortable to our modern sensibilities.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

I don't think antisemitism is a product of the 1980s

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

I don't think antisemitism is a product of the 1980s

It isn't and neither is Roald Dahl

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

Do you think comments appearing to condone Hitler are a product of thevtimevof everyone thst lived through word war 2?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

I don't think antisemitism is a product of the 1980s

It isn't and neither is Roald Dahl"

It's something he said in the 1980s though. So he was out of step at the time, too.

Like look, in the throes of dementia my grandfather said some fucking racist shit (by the standards of the late 00s) that was ok when he was a kid. We ignored it because dementia. If not for the dementia we would have asked him to stop. Before the dementia *he fucking knew better*.

My semi literate labourer grandfather held himself to a higher standard when he was cognitively able to, trying to be polite according to the people around him in the moment. Apparently Dahl thought it was cool to publish this shit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"We should revert back to umpa lumpas being African pygmies smuggled out of Africa.

Mixed views here.

Did RD have a lot of fat adjectives. Yes. Does the story change much if some are removed ? No. So why the big outcry?

I lean to small re-editing as I see little harm. And it probably makes sense to be aware that kids view the world differently.

Eg Joey.

"
Oompa* loompas* and yes his books were very funny and of their time, I love them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

Do you think comments appearing to condone Hitler are a product of thevtimevof everyone thst lived through word war 2?

Some of the people I know in my community would be outraged at the notion that they're "allowed" to condone Hitler. They weren't nitwits during WW2 and, though age brings its challenges, they aren't nitwits now.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"We should revert back to umpa lumpas being African pygmies smuggled out of Africa.

Mixed views here.

Did RD have a lot of fat adjectives. Yes. Does the story change much if some are removed ? No. So why the big outcry?

I lean to small re-editing as I see little harm. And it probably makes sense to be aware that kids view the world differently.

Eg Joey.

Oompa* loompas* and yes his books were very funny and of their time, I love them

But the oompa loompas were a heretical woke snowflake censorship of Dahl!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ortyairCouple over a year ago

Wallasey

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

Do you think comments appearing to condone Hitler are a product of thevtimevof everyone thst lived through word war 2?

What Dahl said is wrong but there doesn't seem to be the same outrage applied to others who did similar things, Coco Chanel?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

They dress it up with words such as inclusive and progressive and at the same time attack his character and anti-semitism to further justify their changes.

This is a quote from 1983

So I think its reasonable to attack his character and accuse him of antisemitism

Do you think comments appearing to condone Hitler are a product of thevtimevof everyone thst lived through word war 2?

What Dahl said is wrong but there doesn't seem to be the same outrage applied to others who did similar things, Coco Chanel?"

There's current outrage over Dahl because Dahl is currently in the media cycle. It'll blow over.

I know plenty of people who have a list of people and businesses that they just quietly don't support. Chanel is on many of those lists.

This brouhaha is a product of media outrage cycles, that's all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

One thing to keep in mind is that the originals still exist, both hard copy and on the Internet, and until the intent shuts down or they come around and confiscate your books to burn, they will always exist in their "original" form and version.

If you want to read those versions you can, if you want to read to your own kids with these books you can.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"One thing to keep in mind is that the originals still exist, both hard copy and on the Internet, and until the intent shuts down or they come around and confiscate your books to burn, they will always exist in their "original" form and version.

If you want to read those versions you can, if you want to read to your own kids with these books you can."

That's far too sensible.

Pitchforks!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

Why don't these woke extremists just burn Dahl's old books and be done with it. Force schools to only adopt the revised snowy versions and while they are at it bring out a simple set of rules in a little book issued to every child. If course, initially it will be in the news but just a press cycle that will blow over. In time it will be compulsory to carry the rulebook. In time children will be encouraged to report those without rule books. After all, it's for the greater good. But hey, that will just blow over too .. those who object are just a product of their time. History eh? Who needs it ..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Why don't these woke extremists just burn Dahl's old books and be done with it. Force schools to only adopt the revised snowy versions and while they are at it bring out a simple set of rules in a little book issued to every child. If course, initially it will be in the news but just a press cycle that will blow over. In time it will be compulsory to carry the rulebook. In time children will be encouraged to report those without rule books. After all, it's for the greater good. But hey, that will just blow over too .. those who object are just a product of their time. History eh? Who needs it .. "

You do Tom..

If you think King James actually wrote a Bible..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hePerkyPumpkinTV/TS over a year ago

Bristol

Well why not keep the originals and make new "sensitive ones"?

That way everyone is happy.

People won't feel like history is being airbrushed, and the works remain untouched and of their time, just like how the author intended them...

And people that take issue with the outdated words, phrases and views of Roald Dahl (but for some reason still want to read his books) can read the new airbrushed versions.

Personally, I don't like the man, have never read his books and have no intention of reading them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Well why not keep the originals and make new "sensitive ones"?

That way everyone is happy.

People won't feel like history is being airbrushed, and the works remain untouched and of their time, just like how the author intended them...

And people that take issue with the outdated words, phrases and views of Roald Dahl (but for some reason still want to read his books) can read the new airbrushed versions.

Personally, I don't like the man, have never read his books and have no intention of reading them.

I was a big fan as a kid and - as with other authors - had a bit of whiplash when I became more culturally aware. Like, oh, that thing isn't ok and never was. I thought it was ok because I was little.

It's a microcosm of "no gods, no heroes", and a useful lesson. Some people do bad things and good things, and you need to decide how to react to both.

But it's also an avoidable sadness that colours my childhood memories.

(Ultimately I think this is a commercial decision - both the alterations and the decision to turn it into outrage porn)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think its a nice option for parents who don't want to introduce some of the less appropriate phrases and language to their children, and still be able to access the amazing stories he wrote

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end"

I know, right?

Look to the gross and despicable censorship of Aeschylus who wrote a tragedy about the battle of Marathon. After that cats married dogs, the Parthenon was built, men forgot how to be men, the small and disparate Greek city states overcame the might of the Persian empire, families were torn apart by wokeness, the great Greek philosophical works were written, and humanity ceased to exist!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier"

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

What was the penalty for oral?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

What was the penalty for oral?"

Any recipient of same sex relations lost their citizen rights.

Oral sex was likely unknown in classical Greece. Mouths were viewed as far too disgusting for that sort of thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

What was the penalty for oral?

Any recipient of same sex relations lost their citizen rights.

Oral sex was likely unknown in classical Greece. Mouths were viewed as far too disgusting for that sort of thing."

Well the Greeks can do one now

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere"

Indeed.

The first speech of Aeschines (available for free on the Perseus project) involves, in part, a discussion of potential disenfranchisement of a man receiving same sex relations.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hePerkyPumpkinTV/TS over a year ago

Bristol

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

I always heard that ancient Greek men "used women for breeding and men for fun"

Is this just one of those bullshit stories that stuck over the years?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere

Indeed.

The first speech of Aeschines (available for free on the Perseus project) involves, in part, a discussion of potential disenfranchisement of a man receiving same sex relations."

They were pretty chill about it if the other man was a minor as far as I can remember.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

I always heard that ancient Greek men "used women for breeding and men for fun"

Is this just one of those bullshit stories that stuck over the years?"

Partial truth. If you were a citizen you could be penalised for it (only as a recipient), but many thinkers viewed same sex relations (between men) as the purest form of physical bond.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere

Indeed.

The first speech of Aeschines (available for free on the Perseus project) involves, in part, a discussion of potential disenfranchisement of a man receiving same sex relations.

They were pretty chill about it if the other man was a minor as far as I can remember.

Nope. It was the minors who were disenfranchised as adults.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere

Indeed.

The first speech of Aeschines (available for free on the Perseus project) involves, in part, a discussion of potential disenfranchisement of a man receiving same sex relations.

They were pretty chill about it if the other man was a minor as far as I can remember.

Nope. It was the minors who were disenfranchised as adults."

Is this your masters or PhD

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hePerkyPumpkinTV/TS over a year ago

Bristol

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

I always heard that ancient Greek men "used women for breeding and men for fun"

Is this just one of those bullshit stories that stuck over the years?

Partial truth. If you were a citizen you could be penalised for it (only as a recipient), but many thinkers viewed same sex relations (between men) as the purest form of physical bond."

Bromance is pretty powerful stuff

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I honestly missed the Dahl book about Greeks getting freaky

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end

I know, right?

And if we'd kept the Greek way being a bi male would be the norm and my life would be easier

I... Happen to have studied Greek sexuality in detail

No oral, no anal (intercrural sex was the norm), and if you are the recipient of same sex relations you lose your citizen rights

Awesome. Much better

Is that right? Certainly not the portrayal elsewhere

Indeed.

The first speech of Aeschines (available for free on the Perseus project) involves, in part, a discussion of potential disenfranchisement of a man receiving same sex relations.

They were pretty chill about it if the other man was a minor as far as I can remember.

Nope. It was the minors who were disenfranchised as adults.

Is this your masters or PhD"

No. I studied something vaguely related, but did some research assistant work for a mentor who was doing a deep dive into classical Greek sexuality.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I honestly missed the Dahl book about Greeks getting freaky"

I mean it started with the censorship of the playwright Aeschylus...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Just a bunch of snowflakes. Too easily offended, wet blankets, they need to man up. If they can’t take it, don’t read it! Next thing the’ll be changing Miss Trunchball’s cake the kid ate to an enormous slice rather than the whole thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Just a bunch of snowflakes. Too easily offended, wet blankets, they need to man up. If they can’t take it, don’t read it! Next thing the’ll be changing Miss Trunchball’s cake the kid ate to an enormous slice rather than the whole thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

Lots of thread hijacking here.

This is about Dall...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

Yeah, a load of people getting all offended and upset. I agree they should. Definitely over the top in their reactions isn’t it. I really don't get it why they are so upset and offended at all. It's just words that can't hurt people. They should just accept it for what it is.

A simple changing of words.

Both as bad and as snowflake like as each other. It's so fucking hilarious at this point.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

A simple changing of words.

Both as bad and as snowflake like as each other. It's so fucking hilarious at this point. "

A simple changing of words,,,?

Tell your lawyer that on the will when the holder dies

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

A simple changing of words.

Both as bad and as snowflake like as each other. It's so fucking hilarious at this point.

A simple changing of words,,,?

Tell your lawyer that on the will when the holder dies"
I will be livid if the lawyer decides to give my fortune to my "grandson" rather than my "fat bastard grandson" as I clearly stated. Fucking lefty lawyers. I'm coming back to haunt the bastard.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

A simple changing of words.

Both as bad and as snowflake like as each other. It's so fucking hilarious at this point.

A simple changing of words,,,?

Tell your lawyer that on the will when the holder diesI will be livid if the lawyer decides to give my fortune to my "grandson" rather than my "fat bastard grandson" as I clearly stated. Fucking lefty lawyers. I'm coming back to haunt the bastard. "

Toms point exactly

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ictoria_1976TV/TS over a year ago

Lanson

"Why do these buggers not rewrite the Bible ... ? "

God knows!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Why are people more offended by things now

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Why are people more offended by things now "
are they? Or are they more aware of causing offence?

Or creating poor stereotypes for kids? It's a kid book ... Do you need a character to be fat (and describe it so) of it adds no value. And if they do need to be big (Eg the chocolate factory fella) why not exaggerate it for effect.

That where I'm leaning. Partly because I think back to my childhood and realise that kids can be (inadvertently at times) mean.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Why are people more offended by things now "

Robust outrage machine within the media creating a steady stream of clicks from people who are horrified that the world is changing.

People get offended because they're threatened by change, not realising that it's something that's always happened (see, for example, the oompa loompa example cited above).

They're also upset that people who are different to them have a voice now, and feel threatened that the power dynamics might shift from straight white cisgender able bodied men.

They're victims of social media and the way devices have changed our brains, capitalising on the hijacking of the amygdala to promote further use of social media and thus get more eyeballs in front of advertisements.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

A victory for common sense...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah"

Will the black pygmy African s1aves be back? Or is it a revised edition that isn't the original...

How much would a publishing house pay for this much exposure, I mean talk of these books have been everywhere in the media this week, it's almost like the publisher and Dahl estate deliberateky created a controversy to generate publicity and keep the cash cow going

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah

Will the black pygmy African s1aves be back? Or is it a revised edition that isn't the original...

As I said above, the outrage industry is enormously profitable and puts some people on edge.

What will people cry about next? Films are different from their childhood? History teachers wanting to present actual evidence rather than outdated nonsense that caters to their feelings?

Maybe the fact that they'll have to wait for the originals (or "before this edit" versions, because I'm not sure the truth matters much here, re Willy Wonka). And that they'll have to share the space with people who disagree with them!

I see some very Willy Wonka outrage porn

https://youtu.be/TRTkCHE1sS4

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This is just new Coke ... But probably with intention.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"This is just new Coke ... But probably with intention. "

Oh absolutely. What a magnificent publicity stunt to get people to buy Dahl in any version.

I have no idea if the publishers wanted to be sensitive or not, but I bet the fuss will be rewarding. And I bet they intended to do that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hePerkyPumpkinTV/TS over a year ago

Bristol

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah"

So they stole my idea.

Took me a second to think that they should just keep the old "classic" books and print the new "Airbrushed" books

If I worked at puffin this whole debacle could have been avoided within a quick conversation.

What a remarkable frenzy over such a simple problem.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah

So they stole my idea.

Took me a second to think that they should just keep the old "classic" books and print the new "Airbrushed" books

If I worked at puffin this whole debacle could have been avoided within a quick conversation.

What a remarkable frenzy over such a simple problem."

Yes, but by creating the frenzy, they got a huge amount of attention. Which probably translates into profit somehow.

I wouldn't put it past marketing people to deliberately wind people up on purpose for a publicity stunt.

(Even before the news of the "classic version" - fuck me, second hand exists, calm down

)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hePerkyPumpkinTV/TS over a year ago

Bristol

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah

So they stole my idea.

Took me a second to think that they should just keep the old "classic" books and print the new "Airbrushed" books

If I worked at puffin this whole debacle could have been avoided within a quick conversation.

What a remarkable frenzy over such a simple problem.

Yes, but by creating the frenzy, they got a huge amount of attention. Which probably translates into profit somehow.

I wouldn't put it past marketing people to deliberately wind people up on purpose for a publicity stunt.

(Even before the news of the "classic version" - fuck me, second hand exists, calm down

Yes it wouldn't surprise me if it was all a money making ploy from the start

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

"I've just seen the news that Puffin will be releasing "classic" Dahl editions.

Looks like cats aren't marrying dogs and the world isn't ending. And you don't even have to buy second hand if you want original Dahl.

Rejoice, marketing has found a solution that involves spending more money. Hurrah

So they stole my idea.

Took me a second to think that they should just keep the old "classic" books and print the new "Airbrushed" books

If I worked at puffin this whole debacle could have been avoided within a quick conversation.

What a remarkable frenzy over such a simple problem.

Yes, but by creating the frenzy, they got a huge amount of attention. Which probably translates into profit somehow.

I wouldn't put it past marketing people to deliberately wind people up on purpose for a publicity stunt.

(Even before the news of the "classic version" - fuck me, second hand exists, calm down

Oh there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the majority of product related controversy is 100% manufactured by an advertising team to gather as much attention as possible.

100% totally free publicity.

Though there are a few exceptions in which the controversy is created entirely by the outraged themselves,with no actual involvement from the creators and their pr team, giving the product an unbelievable amount of free publicity,and success regardless.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

Yeah I'm sure it hasn't harmed sale's either way

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

"What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

So you are offended by something just as trivial as they are. Both sides are as sensitive as each other, the difference is one side just flat out refuses to admit it.

Because that is essentially what is going on this entire time, one side wanting it their way. And the other crying about it.

And the wheel continues on its eternal cycle.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

I think in this instance it's them looking at cultural trends. Same as M&S deciding that people would find teal velvet boots fashionable in the leadup to Christmas, then selling them.

I looked and went wtf is that?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

"What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

So you are offended by something just as trivial as they are. Both sides are as sensitive as each other, the difference is one side just flat out refuses to admit it.

Because that is essentially what is going on this entire time, one side wanting it their way. And the other crying about it.

And the wheel continues on its eternal cycle. "

That's the snowflake generation for you...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

"What I find offensive is some do-gooder telling "me" what I should find offensive, making a decision on my behalf then changing things based on their opinion.

I tell you what I'm fucking sick of all this sensitive mamby Pamby fucking nonsense I FIND IT OFFENSIVE.

Bunch of cunts, how's that for offensive?

So you are offended by something just as trivial as they are. Both sides are as sensitive as each other, the difference is one side just flat out refuses to admit it.

Because that is essentially what is going on this entire time, one side wanting it their way. And the other crying about it.

And the wheel continues on its eternal cycle. "

But I find this offensive

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Can we a book club for the books or should I start my own thread?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"It's absolute bollocks..where does it end"
exactly

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hetalkingstoveMan over a year ago

London

Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

But the publishers saw a chance to get the books into the news, knowing that the usual right wing journalists and commentariat would lose their shit about it and give a load of free publicity. Worked perfectly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

It's not polite to call people fat but is it polite to call them enormous?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Enormous sounds monstrous, worse than fat

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ris GrayMan over a year ago

Dorchester

"It's not polite to call people fat but is it polite to call them enormous?"
or fabulous

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ssex_tom OP Man over a year ago

Chelmsford

"Enormous sounds monstrous, worse than fat"

Well that's the word these woke meddling types are using

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

"It's not polite to call people fat but is it polite to call them enormous?"

What if they are an enormous twat?

As in "you big twat"

And not

"You're a fat twat"

Very different

But enormous maybe a statement of fact.

If someone is 6ft 8 and 350kgs

I think enormous would be an appropriate word.

Clearly they are not just big they are enormous but not in a fat way.

Or they could be gigantic.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Enormous sounds monstrous, worse than fat

Well that's the word these woke meddling types are using "

*Nods* all very odd isn't it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!"

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Good for him. When I decide what I think on the basis of a celebrity and their tweets, you'll be the first to know.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Good for him. When I decide what I think on the basis of a celebrity and their tweets, you'll be the first to know."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aitonelMan over a year ago

Liverpool

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Of course he has, because it is a publicity thing for him. Just like the publishers did. Opportunistic to the maximum.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

[Removed by poster at 24/02/23 14:51:57]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Is Billy Bragg really rapidly left wing?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Is Billy Bragg really rapidly left wing? "
seen his Twitter?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroLondonMan over a year ago

Mayfair

I just popped in Peter Harrington (fine books) on Brompton Road and bought a few Dahl ¹st editions.

They weren't cheap — I would have procured more had I been flush with Bøøk Tøkens — but I'm supporting local businesses.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

This is the amusing part isn't it.

No one called for this, but it's been amazing seeing people on this thread and elsewhere get so angry. And constantly referring to people being easily offended with absolute no irony

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Ministry of truth at work. All this toxic nonsense originates from the USA.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Is Billy Bragg really rapidly left wing? "

No, he's not that quick.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Good for him. When I decide what I think on the basis of a celebrity and their tweets, you'll be the first to know."

Lol, that's ok - keep it to yourself. I'm not interested in what you think

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

This is the amusing part isn't it.

No one called for this, but it's been amazing seeing people on this thread and elsewhere get so angry. And constantly referring to people being easily offended with absolute no irony "

Meanwhile, you'd think people would be upset by a place that has a list of state sanctioned books.

Except it's Florida, so it's good censorship or something

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ron-desantis-book-bans-florida-b2270116.html

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ohn KanakaMan over a year ago

Not all that North of North London

"Worth remembering that nobody was actually asking for this. Nobody.

And the left get the blame because of course we do

Why couldn't it have been a great lesson in personal responsibility? You can't always get what you want (original Dahl) and you have to work ever so slightly harder to get it.

Or here's original Dahl, now children, you get to decide whether you want to talk to other people that way and what they might think of you if you do.

Get in early. Learn responsibility for your actions. It's a win for the right!

Interestingly, Billy Bragg, one of the UK's most rabid left-wingers, has tweeted that he supports the decision to change Dahl's work, to make it more "inclusive".

Is Billy Bragg really rapidly left wing? seen his Twitter?"

I'm fully aware who Billy Bragg is, I've had the pleasure of meeting him, love his music and massively respect hos opinions.

But to describe him as "one of the uks most rabid leftwingers" is nonsensical. His views are hardly extreme

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)