Children’s word of the year in 2021 according to the Oxford University Press was the word anxiety, this was followed by the University of Northampton placing a warning on George Orwell’s book 1984 as offensive.
The warning was given to students taking a module called, Identity Under Construction and students are warned that it addresses challenging issues related to violence, gender, sexuality, class, race, abuses, sexual abuse, political ideas and offensive language.
It seems rather ironic that we are living in an ever increasing woke world where the youth of today are scared to death of everything and demand that historical statues be taken down for fear of upsetting someone and take matters into their own hands where councils refuse to act, where students in Universities are considered so anxious they need warnings as to the contents of established literary works, until finally nothing is left.
I leave you with a quote from a well known book written in 1949 which seems to have been remarkably far sighted.
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
I know I’m becoming a curmudgeonly old sod but I do wish we could try to maintain a semblance of good standards from the current crop of news readers.
This morning Kay Burley was reading about the much anticipated report on the alleged parties which may have taken place in various Government offices since the Covid outbreak and said “as soon as it drops, we’ll be all over it.”
“As soon as it drops, we’ll be all over it,” this is the sort of language I expect from a pubescent youngster with limited vocabulary, spoken with the ever spreading and absolutely dreadful Multicultural London accent so prevalent of late.
I would imagine Alvar Liddell must be turning in his grave, the poor fellow, but for those younger people who may by chance come across this missive I am attaching a link of one of Alvar’s broadcasts as an example of how the news should be read.
I know very little of what Spotify is but it sounds like it is some sort of online radio broadcast, whatever the thing is Harry and Meghan signed a deal worth 18 million pounds to do some podcasts which they suggested would uplift and entertain audiences around the world and feature diverse perspectives and voices.
The deal is apparently worth £18million and so far all they have produced is a trailer for the series, called Archewell Audio, which contained the uplifting and entertaining words, “Fun” and “Happy New Year” spoken by their young son Archie followed by what has been described as an adorable giggle.
I would have thought it might have been more amusing had they got the young tot to fart along to the tune of Colonel Bogey, that really would have been an act that’s hard to follow unless a duet could have been arranged but as the famous French flatulist Le Petomane died in 1945 and the British exponent of the art Mr Methane seems to have retired, this therefore is an act we are unlikely to witness.
The trailer was followed by a holiday special which lasted just 33 minutes and featured James Corden and Sir Elton John but since then absolutely nothing has been produced although Spotify said the first complete series was expected to drop in 2021, I assume by “drop” they mean released; modern language how very amusing!
Spotify has been waiting some considerable time for something from Harry and Meghan and now it appears they have finally had enough and taken matters into their own hands, hoping that by using their own in house talent they might finally squeeze some content from the pair.
I have a feeling the reason they have not produced anything worth listening to is because they have nothing worthwhile to say and that Spotify might have a very good case for getting their money back under the Sale of Goods Act as the product is not fit for purpose.
Even with the assistance of others I shall not be waiting with bated breath for the next episode of Archwell Audio to drop anywhere, except perhaps into the dustbin.
I have just been admonished by Facebook and I must say it came as quite a surprise as I had thought my comment had been a fairly innocent if perhaps a little flippant but certainly not worthy of a full blown drumming down but algorithms are peculiar things.
My mistake happened when I had just finished a post on yet another protester being let off for what certainly seemed to me like a criminal act which left me wondering what on earth was happening with the modern world and the feeling that big brother is definitely watching me.
Someone had posted a photograph of an absolutely enormous black dog and was asking the question, what would you call him? Now, I have the feeling they were not asking the question to get serious answers as indeed the answer before mine was tiddles which I thought was moderately amusing and in keeping with the sort of comment requested, so rather foolishly as it turned out I posted the following with the n word in full.
N****r if I was after being controversial but as I don’t want to upset any of the modern children reading this I would call the dog Woke.
I was suddenly bombarded with the following which rather took me aback and I’m rather hoping I will not get myself in hot water again by repeating the post, although this time I have removed most of the offending letters from the word which I imagine caused the problem, of course in this day and age it might be the word woke, who knows?
Obviously algorithms can read the n word but are unable to read the rest of the sentence where I stated I would not call the dog that name as it may be considered too controversial in this day and age.
I was given the option to appeal which I did but was not offered the option to explain why, which sadly means one can not use the n word on Facebook in any concept at all, I wonder how many other words in the English language they have banned?
Your comment goes against our Community Standards on hate speech
No one else can see your comment.
We have these standards because we want discussions on Facebook to be respectful.
Repeatedly violating our Community Standards can cause further account restrictions.
If you think that we’ve made a mistake, you can disagree with the decision.
N****r if I was after being controversial but as I don’t want to upset any of the modern children reading this I would call the dog Woke.
Our standards on hate speech
We define hate speech as language that attacks people based on their:
• Race, ethnicity, national origin or caste
• Religious affiliation
• Sexual orientation
• Sex, gender or gender identity
• Serious disabilities or diseases
This includes claims about coronavirus (COVID-19).
We sometimes allow things that we’d otherwise consider hate speech: for example when someone shares someone else’s hate speech to raise awareness about it or uses a word in reference to themselves.
A court has heard an elderly Anglican priest and two other Christian environmentalists went too far when they stopped a commuter train during a climate change protest.
I must have missed this story, what with all the fuss about Djokovic but I certainly remember the event which happened at east London’s Shadwell Station in October 17, 2019 and involved 79-year-old Sue Parfitt, from Bristol and 54-year-old Martin Newell, from Birmingham who used a ladder to climb on top of the train’s roof while 85-year-old Philip Kingston, from Patchway in South Gloucestershire superglued himself to the carriage.
A specialist team of officers had to carefully remove Kingston from the train, although myself I would have waved the train out of the station as I’ve never had that much faith in the ability of superglue to stick skin to a train carriage, I’m fairly certain that before the end of the platform he would have released his hand.
Angry passengers who were caught up in the disruption begged the trio to move from the Docklands Light Railway train which one would have thought would have been the sort of transport these people would have encouraged but after 77 minutes of disruption and 15 DLR trains delayed or cancelled, the court heard they still refused to move.
The prosecution’s case was that the defendants went beyond what is permitted or allowable in society in their protest when they deliberately acted unlawfully at a busy time of time of day with a demonstration aimed at attracting attention to the climate change crisis.
Sadly this bunch of idiots were cleared, this despite Reverend Parfitt having been previously found guilty by a district judge at City of London Magistrates’ Court in February 2020 of refusing to obey a police banning order preventing protesters from demonstrating at Oxford Circus and Waterloo Bridge in London in April 2019.
Clearly there is something wrong with our justice system when yet again another bunch of people acting illegally are presumably let off because a jury is too feckless to find them guilty, I’m sorely tempted to have a crack at bank robbery, assuming I was caught I would maintain my innocence in that I was doing it to fund Extinction Rebellion and with a modern jury would be walking free as a bird.
Novak Djokovic has been deported from Australia as Judges have rejected a challenge by the unvaccinated tennis star after the government cancelled his visa on health and good order grounds.
I would have thought it might have been better had he been deported for lying about his Covid status when seen out allegedly after having caught Covid, for lying about his travel destinations prior to flying to Australia and generally being an arrogant so and so.
No matter why, he has been deported for not complying with regulations for entry to the country, a lesson he might learn with regard to the forthcoming American tennis tournaments where non-US citizens must be fully vaccinated to travel to the country, with only limited exceptions.
Bravo to the Australians for sticking to their principals.
Jeremy Clarkson has been refused permission for his scheme to build a hilltop restaurant on his Oxfordshire Diddly Squat farm and was somewhat upset by the councils actions calling one of the planning officials a comedian.
Fellow farmers, other food producers and local residents, were greatly supportive arguing that the case showed a distinct lack of imagination between planners and the needs of modern farmers to find new ways of making a living.
Jeremy argued that his restaurant, which he wanted to open in a converted lambing shed, was the sort of diversification project farmers needed to undertake to survive and his scheme would create jobs for up to 25 people and give local farmers and other food producers a more lucrative market for their goods.
One of only two committee members, Merilyn Davies, a district councillor who supported the restaurant plan added, “I never thought I’d agree with Jeremy Clarkson, he rubs some people up the wrong way but I think his idea of local farmers working as a cooperative to supply the restaurant was interesting.”
This is yet another example of the sort of mess people get into when organizing anything which involves the local council, for never forget, a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Alex Hawke, Australia’s immigration minister has cancelled Novak Djokovic’s visa yet again and released a statement saying it was in the public interest and said, today I exercised my power under section 133C(3) of the Migration Act to cancel the visa held by Mr Novak Djokovic on health and good order grounds
We wait with bated breath to see him finally thrown out of the country, I would have thought lying on more than two occasions about catching Covid, lying about his travel destinations on his visa application and generally being a bit of an arrogant fellow would have been more than enough grounds, let’s hope so.
A man has climbed a ladder to reach the Prospero and Ariel statue which was carved by Eric Gill and has adorned the front of the BBC broadcasting building since 1933.
Whilst the statue is rather splendid it seems the sculptor was a bit of a cad to say the least as he is recorded as having sexually abused his daughters for several years leading to a campaign to have the statue removed.
This statue has done no harm to anybody since 1933 and I would suggest it would be a good idea to leave it there, for whilst the sculptor may have been fairly beastly, the statue was not.
As for how to deal with this fellow who has committed criminal damage it would seem there is no option but to let the law take its course, however after the debacle of the Colston four who were acquitted after clearly taking part in a crime of criminal damage I fear perusing this fellow through the courts may be a waste of taxpayers money.
It seems the Colston four were set free as the jury thought their actions were justified regardless of the fact that they had clearly broken the law and as one of the accused compared their actions to those of the Suffragettes claiming their actions had changed things for the better.
Now while I cannot disagree that the actions of the Suffragettes did change history, I would also point out that to do so they had to face the long arm of the law and endure fairly lengthy prison sentences, unlike these modern people who seem to think it is perfectly fine to smash things to pieces and commit criminal damage without punishment at all.
I do believe that anyone who commits criminal damage should be punished it is the law of the land and as they say if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.
Destroying or damaging property.
(1)A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.
(2)A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another—
(a)intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
(b)intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(3)An offence committed under this section by destroying or damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson.
I came across this topic on Facebook and responded with the following and then thought in my vanity that my reply was better than a quick response on social media so have upgraded it to my blog.
They didn’t do it while I was at school but this may be because it was an all boys school, however I have managed to perfect some signature dishes since leaving school. One of my favourites is oeuf scramble, another is fromage sur toast and also haricot sur toast, these dishes stood me in good stead during my years as a single man supplemented by numerous trips to my local Indian which was luckily within walking distance of my house.
I never learned how to make lager but as luck would have it the restaurant had copious amounts on tap.
So I say bravo to home economics and the ability to sew on a button.