Danny Baker says he has been 'fired' over royal baby chimp tweet Watch

Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#201
Report 2 months ago
#201
(Original post by LeoKisia)
Being a Black person is one of the hardest thing in the world.....
Even if you are white?
0
reply
LeoKisia
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#202
Report 2 months ago
#202
(Original post by Good bloke)
Even if you are white?
Absolutely
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#203
Report 2 months ago
#203
(Original post by mgi)
This, as i hope you realise is not about joking! You have drifted off the point. It is about racist behaviour." Being racist is not illegal?" a poster says; So clearly, some people on this thread have not heard of race discrimination tribunals or the Equality Act 2010? Notice now how the conversation has now foolishly and pointlessly being shifted to a conversation about what comedy is or isn't? Danny Baker's chimp nonsense was in no way a comedy routine. Racism somehow always bends over backwards to try to divert attention away from the racism that is still found in British society. We have laws on racism in this country precisely so that we can deal with people who think that comparing the Royal to a chimp is acceptable and not racism and also that racism is not really racism if its " accidental " Absurd. Accidental, unintentional- not really relevant
You are embarrassing yourself. You repeatedly make silly claims about the Equality Act and about intent despite the fact that I have provided you with links to the relevant legislation that prove you are completely wrong.

The time has come, therefore, for you to provide a link to a piece of legislation that supports your case, and to explain how you think it shows Danny Baker might have been committing a criminal offence..
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#204
Report 2 months ago
#204
(Original post by LeoKisia)
Absolutely
I suspect that the newest member of the royal family, a white black person is going to suffer very little oppression in his life.
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#205
Report 2 months ago
#205
(Original post by mgi)
This, as i hope you realise is not about joking! You have drifted off the point. It is about racist behaviour." Being racist is not illegal?" a poster says; So clearly, some people on this thread have not heard of race discrimination tribunals or the Equality Act 2010? Notice now how the conversation has now foolishly and pointlessly being shifted to a conversation about what comedy is or isn't? Danny Baker's chimp nonsense was in no way a comedy routine. Racism somehow always bends over backwards to try to divert attention away from the racism that is still found in British society. We have laws on racism in this country precisely so that we can deal with people who think that comparing the Royal to a chimp is acceptable and not racism and also that racism is not really racism if its " accidental " Absurd. Accidental, unintentional- not really relevant
What have you popped out of your box about here, exactly? I can't quite see the point of your rant, other than to assume bad faith at every turn.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#206
Report 2 months ago
#206
(Original post by QE2)
Indeed it is. It's like all critical analysis goes out of the window. I'm not sure whether it is because people are genuinely a bit dim or because they are terrified of being denounced themselves. Probably a combination.
Yes, on both sides, people vehemently defend their position regardless of whether their point makes sense or not.

The running argument on this thread is that the person who commits an offence should decide whether it was offensive or not. I was blown away.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#207
Report 2 months ago
#207
(Original post by Wired_1800)
t the person who commits an offence should decide whether it was offensive or not.
As I just said to Mgi (and challenged him/her to show otherwise), nobody has committed an offence. As to whether something was offensive to an individual, that is a personal judgement but the intent can only genuinely be spoken for by the author.
Last edited by Good bloke; 2 months ago
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#208
Report 2 months ago
#208
Tbh I think it's great the royal family experience racism now lol. It means they'll be able to relate to minorities, what they face everyday and attention will be drawn to those issues. It will only lead to positive change in society.
Last edited by ChickenMadness; 2 months ago
0
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#209
Report 2 months ago
#209
(Original post by Wired_1800)
The running argument on this thread is that the person who commits an offence should decide whether it was offensive or not. I was blown away.
I rather thought it was the sensible argument that just because someone was offended doesn't mean it's offensive. There's no right 'not to be offended'. And that maybe that chimp acted a a big red confirmation bias to a lot of people who spend much of their time being outraged, and are fundamentally squeamish about the fact that there are any white middle-aged men still left at the BBC.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#210
Report 2 months ago
#210
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
Tbh I think it's great the royal family experience racism now lol.
Well, the author claims that it was intended as a class joke, not a race joke, and that makes more sense even if it doesn't satisfy those who seek to show moral outrage.
1
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#211
Report 2 months ago
#211
(Original post by Good bloke)
Well, the author claims that it was intended as a class joke, not a race joke, and that makes more sense even if it doesn't satisfy those who seek to show moral outrage.
Seems like a stretch to me. Black people have always been compared to monkeys / apes as an insult.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#212
Report 2 months ago
#212
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
Seems like a stretch to me. Black people have always been compared to monkeys / apes as an insult.
As is obvious from the published photos, this baby is not black.
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#213
Report 2 months ago
#213
(Original post by Reality Check)
I rather thought it was the sensible argument that just because someone was offended doesn't mean it's offensive. There's no right 'not to be offended'. And that maybe that chimp acted a a big red confirmation bias to a lot of people who spend much of their time being outraged, and are fundamentally squeamish about the fact that there are any white middle-aged men still left at the BBC.
That is a fair point. However, i think there should be an objective level of common sense. Not allow people to dictate whether their comments or actions is offensive. If we go down that road, we could descend into chaos.

Yes, i’d agree that the response towards Danny was a bit too harsh. However, the idea that he is a victim is a bit silly. He claimed that he did not know there was a royal baby, then it came out that he had made a twitter post before that day blasting the media for focusing too much on the royal baby news.

To me, I think it was a tasteless and racist joke. I don't think he thought he would receive so much flak for it, but I think he clearly knew what he was doing.

It was the same with Alan Sugar, when he insulted those African sellers. He then tried to defend it before deleting it.

I think middle aged white men would need to come into the 21st century. If they are incompetent to know how to act in today’s world, I don't think they should be at the nation’s top broadcaster.
Last edited by Wired_1800; 2 months ago
0
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#214
Report 2 months ago
#214
(Original post by Good bloke)
As I just said to Mgi (and challenged him/her to show otherwise), nobody has committed an offence. As to whether something was offensive to an individual, that is a personal judgement but the intent can only genuinely be spoken for by the author.
I disagree. There should be an objective view on what is being said or done. Just because someone says he did not intend it, might not be true. They may lie to avoid the consequence of making a racist joke.

Someone can post a picture of a Jewish person and a gas chamber, but then argue that it was not intended to be anti-semitic and racist. Let us not go down that road.
1
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#215
Report 2 months ago
#215
(Original post by Good bloke)
As is obvious from the published photos, this baby is not black.
The mother is. :dontknow:
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#216
Report 2 months ago
#216
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
The mother is. :dontknow:
Are you defined by what your mother is, or by what you are?
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#217
Report 2 months ago
#217
(Original post by Good bloke)
Are you defined by what your mother is, or by what you are?
Yes lol. You have your parents' genes.
1
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#218
Report 2 months ago
#218
(Original post by Wired_1800)
I disagree. There should be an objective view on what is being said or done. Just because someone says he did not intend it, might not be true. They may lie to avoid the consequence of making a racist joke.

Someone can post a picture of a Jewish person and a gas chamber, but then argue that it was not intended to be anti-semitic and racist. Let us not go down that road.
Danny Baker is a comedian. He earns his living from telling jokes. Some of them are offensive to some people, as is the case with anyone who is truly funny.

In this case nobody has come forward to say that the joke would be offensive in all circumstances. The photo is not offensive in itself, it merely documents an event. If it is used to poke fun of rich people is it offensive? Nobody has said so. if it is used to poke fun at a white baby, is it offensive? Again, apparently not. Only if it is used to poke fun at a black person does it become (necessarily) offensive. This makes no sense. especially when that black person is actually white.

Is comedy to be a banned occupation?
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#219
Report 2 months ago
#219
(Original post by QE2)
No. According to mgi, if you ask at B&Q if they have any spades, and there is a black employee working there, you are a racist.
Lol
(Original post by mgi)
Do you see the issue? You have now resorted to making false accusations and insults instead of trying to objectively look at the issues of racism that this country faces. So you now conclude for some reason " that i get the feeling that you don't like white people either".So, in your view, in order for you to get to grips with my comments on race it is important for you to speculate on whether I " like white people ". But why? Do i need to speculate with you about whether or not you " like black people " before I debate your views on Danny Baker's conduct? So you are questioning the motives behind my argument but you are apparently ok with the so called good intentions/motives of Danny Baker. Your phrase " drunk on all this racialism" insult is a classic comment similar to the "playing the race card" one. This, in my opinion, are the classic dismissive techniques for attempting to shut down the serious debate or concerns about racism in our society; it is the elephant in the room! Other avoidance techniques are to blame the victim, switch the conversation to something irrelevant , evade the point being made or even ignore it or find a, usually implausible, excuse for the behaviour of the alleged racist or the old classic chestnut" my best friend is black" (proving what i have no clue)The majority racial group (in this case, whites, need to make more effort to engage in intelligent debate about racism and its effects rather than worry about being called racist or quickly defending the alleged perpetrator! So, for example, suppose Danny Baker was black, would that have made a difference to how you or the BBC viewed or treated this matter? If so, why? If not, why not?
The reason why these debates are sidelined is ,i think, because it, deliberately or otherwise, "benefits "' the majority white population in terms of getting an unfair economic advantage via successsful job applications, promotions, leadership positions, better pay etc. It is called the phenomenon of whiteness/ white privilege!
You just sound like you've come from a scientology or flat earth meet up.
"you can always tell a skeptic because they'll try to convince you that your beliefs are false, and might even use facts and evidence to rebut you. This is a trick!"

Btw if Danny Baker was black, we wouldn't even be here debating this. Now that's racist but I'm guessing not the form of racism you seem to have a problem with.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#220
Report 2 months ago
#220
(Original post by Wired_1800)
The running argument on this thread is that the person who commits an offence should decide whether it was offensive or not. I was blown away.
I hesitate to put you in the "a bit dim" group, but that's not the argument at all.
It is that only Baker knows for certain whether there was any racist intent behind the post, therefore any assertions that he is a racist and the post was intended to be racist are clearly unfounded.
His actions after the post and his lack of previous racist comments suggest on balance that he is not a racist and the post was not intended to be racist.
The claims by some that intent is irrelevant and that a person is racist if randoms on the internet decide they are is equally flawed.
Hope this helped.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

What are your favourite crisps?

Kettle Chips (8)
13.79%
McCoys Salt and Vinegar (4)
6.9%
McCoys Flame Grilled Steak (2)
3.45%
Walkers Prawn Cockail (9)
15.52%
Monster Munch (6)
10.34%
Pringles (12)
20.69%
Walkers Oven Baked Crisps (4)
6.9%
Walkers Beef and Onion (1)
1.72%
Thai Sweet Chili Sensations (12)
20.69%

Watched Threads

View All