Tory MP belittles Marcus Rashford

2

Comments

  • I like the final comment, that once again a group of young football players are providing a better opposition than Keir Starmer.
  • Before the final I thought if the England team wins, they'd be invited to Downing St for a photo op so Johnson could meet some successful people and hope to bask in their glory. I imagined (hoped) the reply would be "no thanks but we invite you to our training ground - along with other leaders of parties with seats in England."

    Still, I'm pleased they refused the invitation.
  • The original comment was "Racist Tory MPs and their fan-clubs." Half the time (possibly more) I think the fan-clubs are more of a problem than the MPs themselves. There are a lot of decent Tory MPs (likely including those who voted against killing people by cutting funding for overseas aid), and some who act in unreasonable ways because of the pressure that comes from the fan-clubs of the lunatics. MPs shouldn't be pressurised into making racist statements, or otherwise acting stupidly and destructively, by newspaper editors and bloggers let alone by trolls on Twitter.

    Yes, the Meeja has (have?) a lot to answer for.

    I wonder if perhaps HMS Unnecessary won't be large enough to accommodate all of those belonging to the fan-clubs.

    Maybe we need to build barracks on the deck of HMS Big Liz (the aircraft carrier), such barracks to be of the same standard as those five-star hotels provided by the GoHome Secretary for asylum seekers.

    (Again, this is irony and satire).
  • Before the final I thought if the England team wins, they'd be invited to Downing St for a photo op so Johnson could meet some successful people and hope to bask in their glory. I imagined (hoped) the reply would be "no thanks but we invite you to our training ground - along with other leaders of parties with seats in England."

    Still, I'm pleased they refused the invitation.

    I liked the comment *Boris is cancelled*.

    If only...
  • SandemaniacSandemaniac Shipmate
    Yes, the Meeja has (have?) a lot to answer for.

    Today's Torygraph has a front page article along the lines of "Why does no-one talk about the racism Priti Patel receives?".

    Ermm.... because she's dishing it out as well? You would hope that someone who has experienced it themselves might have a somewhat more nuanced view than "Push the boats back!", which isn't much better (if at all) than Rivers of Blood, but it seems not.
  • DooneDoone Shipmate
    I have no time for football and all the histrionics around it, but this gladdens my heart and gives some hope, especially with the wonderful response, by ordinary people, to the racism in Manchester.
  • Yes, the Meeja has (have?) a lot to answer for.

    Today's Torygraph has a front page article along the lines of "Why does no-one talk about the racism Priti Patel receives?".

    Ermm.... because she's dishing it out as well? You would hope that someone who has experienced it themselves might have a somewhat more nuanced view than "Push the boats back!", which isn't much better (if at all) than Rivers of Blood, but it seems not.

    The wretched woman is indeed one of the worst racists in the current Ghastly Gang of Gibbering Gobshites. If she has been the subject of racism herself, that doesn't really excuse her, given her position in the *gummint*.
    Doone wrote: »
    I have no time for football and all the histrionics around it, but this gladdens my heart and gives some hope, especially with the wonderful response, by ordinary people, to the racism in Manchester.

    This. It didn't take long for the Positive Stuff to cover up the shameful vandalism of the Marcus Mural.

    Evil flourishes when good people do nothing, but when good people do do something good, evil is seen for the murky and banal crock of shit it really is.
  • Penny SPenny S Shipmate
    I have heard that it may not be true that Pritti Patel is racist, as she exhibits very unpleasant behaviour to everyone. When the cameras are off.
  • I'm uncomfortable about people calling her things like 'Ugli'. It doesn't really work (as it's visual and untrue) and provides the opportunity for her defenders to use accusations of racism or gender against her critics which deflates and deflects the criticism.

    Why not stick with "Priti unpleasant", "Priti nasty", "Priti hypocritical" or similar? It still plays on her name but in a way any politician's name may be used in mockery.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited July 14
    I'm uncomfortable about people calling her things like 'Ugli'. It doesn't really work (as it's visual and untrue) and provides the opportunity for her defenders to use accusations of racism or gender against her critics which deflates and deflects the criticism.

    Why not stick with "Priti unpleasant", "Priti nasty", "Priti hypocritical" or similar? It still plays on her name but in a way any politician's name may be used in mockery.

    Well, I have myself been taken to task for using the name *Ugli* (albeit only in Hell...), but I take the point, and will amend my Wicked Ways accordingly. The idea was that *Ugli* would be descriptive of her character and behaviour, but not everyone appreciated that, which is fair enough.
  • Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it
  • I do.

    Since when has Parliament had anything useful to say or do about Real Life? Especially for victims of racism.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    In this they are just following the lead of the BBC over the last few days.
  • Furtive GanderFurtive Gander Shipmate
    edited July 15
    Wrong thread?

    WTF has the BBC got to do with it? Do you mean white media people (incl Beeb) are reporting the racism issue? And right-wing media are much more likely to give a 'lead' to this government.
  • Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it
    Actually, Zarah Sultana did speak in the debate. Her contribution was summarily dismissed by the government as "lowering the tone" of the debate.
  • How long, O Lord? How long?

    Kyrie eleison
    Christe eleison
    Kyrie eleison
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    edited July 15
    Wrong thread?

    WTF has the BBC got to do with it?

    In this case they had series of all white panels to discuss the issue over a few days, featuring a number of people who had either written favourably of people like the Orban government, or with a past history of making inflamatory statements.
  • CathscatsCathscats Shipmate
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it
    Actually, Zarah Sultana did speak in the debate. Her contribution was summarily dismissed by the government as "lowering the tone" of the debate.
    Good grief. What did she say?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited July 15
    She probably told The Truth™, which the *government* would NOT like, that commodity being in rather short supply on the front benches (possibly owing to Brexit-related delays).

    That was irony, BTW.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Cathscats wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it
    Actually, Zarah Sultana did speak in the debate. Her contribution was summarily dismissed by the government as "lowering the tone" of the debate.
    Good grief. What did she say?

    There's video of this exchange here: https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/1415309443189903361
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited July 15
    Cathscats wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.

    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it
    Actually, Zarah Sultana did speak in the debate. Her contribution was summarily dismissed by the government as "lowering the tone" of the debate.
    Good grief. What did she say?

    There's video of this exchange here: https://twitter.com/zarahsultana/status/1415309443189903361

    Thank you @chrisstiles. As I suspected, she told it like it is.

    If I lead the Prayers of the Fitful on Sundays, I always pray that God will raise up for us leaders of honesty, compassion, and integrity. I haven't seen an answer to that prayer yet, but I live in tenuous hope.

    Ms Sultana will, one day, hopefully, be a Minister in HM (or the English Republic's) government.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Follow the comments on the video and the horror just gets worse:

    https://twitter.com/RealNatalieRowe/status/1117453001638207489

    https://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2018/08/boris-and-monkey-melon-moment.html

    What more do folk want?

  • To see the back of the whole horrible gang?
    :grimace:
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?
    read it for yourself.

    Yes, there was defence of racism from Ms Patel (failure to condemn racism is a form of racism), and from Mr Johnson.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    edited July 15
    Telford wrote: »
    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?
    read it for yourself.

    Yes, there was defence of racism from Ms Patel (failure to condemn racism is a form of racism), and from Mr Johnson.
    Neither Ms Patel of the PM took part in the short debate and neither of them have defended racism.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.

    Yes, but is it inaccurate?
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.

    Why do you think it might be a problem that all the people in a given conversation about racism are white?

  • Telford wrote: »
    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    OK, let's make this very clear.

    If you're having a discussion about racism, and the people in the room who have experienced racism aren't talking, then your discussion has a fundamental problem. It's like a room full of stupid people arguing about whether the Earth is flat or not, with a few astronauts and airline pilots sitting quietly in the corner. It just fundamentally makes no sense.

    If you're having a discussion about racism, and the people who have experienced racism aren't even in the room, you have a different problem.
  • I wondered how long it would be before the Fan Club (Sid & Doris Bonkers) turned up to display their ignorance again...
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.

    Yes, but is it inaccurate?
    Not at all.

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.

    Why do you think it might be a problem that all the people in a given conversation about racism are white?
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    OK, let's make this very clear.

    If you're having a discussion about racism, and the people in the room who have experienced racism aren't talking, then your discussion has a fundamental problem. It's like a room full of stupid people arguing about whether the Earth is flat or not, with a few astronauts and airline pilots sitting quietly in the corner. It just fundamentally makes no sense.

    If you're having a discussion about racism, and the people who have experienced racism aren't even in the room, you have a different problem.

    Who prevented them from being in the room ?
  • I believe the Speaker selects who has the opportunity to speak in the Commons.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.

    Why do you think it might be a problem that all the people in a given conversation about racism are white?
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.

    That’s pretty much the extent of the topic of slavery then. Glad we sorted that out.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.
    Slavery was not abolished in the British Empire until 1833 (and even then the territories of the East India Company were excepted).

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.
    Slavery was not abolished in the British Empire until 1833 (and even then the territories of the East India Company were excepted).

    Yes it was the result of many years of campaigning.
  • CameronCameron Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »

    It was utterly shameful.

    No amount of wilfully ignorant, irrelevant distraction contradicts the evidence for endemic racism, and the role of hypocrites like Priti Patel and Boris Johnson in fuelling it.

    As the reactions of sports commentators and the general public in Manchester have shown, people are less and less likely to let such moral bankruptcy pass. That, at least, is an encouraging thought.
  • Cameron wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »

    It was utterly shameful.

    No amount of wilfully ignorant, irrelevant distraction contradicts the evidence for endemic racism, and the role of hypocrites like Priti Patel and Boris Johnson in fuelling it.

    As the reactions of sports commentators and the general public in Manchester have shown, people are less and less likely to let such moral bankruptcy pass. That, at least, is an encouraging thought.

    This.

  • AnselminaAnselmina Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.
    In other news that just boggles the imagination, this afternoon Parliament debates racism and not a single BAME MP (there are 63 of them) has been chosen to speak. That's right, Parliament is going to debate racism without hearing from anyone who has ever been the victim of racism. I don't believe it

    Did any of the speakers defend racism ?

    I remember sitting in a plane flying to Iceland, looking down on the Hebrides from cruising altitude.

    We still cleared those islands by a smaller distance than that by which the point went over your head there.

    Hell, astronauts in the ISS have the same experience.

    Please explain what you are on about.

    Why do you think it might be a problem that all the people in a given conversation about racism are white?
    Over 200 years ago Slavery in the British empire was abolished by an all white Parliament.

    I'm sure you fully understand and take the point that 200 years ago an all white Parliament would be the only option for those times. I'm sure you also understand that one of the reasons abolishing the legal slave trade (slavery in Britain is, sadly, still alive and kicking) was such a struggle was because white (mainly male, Anglican/Protestant) politicians weren't particularly interested in listening to others who weren't.

    We don't live 200 years ago. We don't have the excuse for that kind of ignorance. We now live in a nation that has, representationally, people who are not only white but are non-white and from other ethnicities and cultures. It's really not hard to conclude that some of these people have valuable contributions to make about the experience of being non-white and from ethnic minorities. There are even Parliamentarians who are non-white and from ethnic minority backgrounds. As Parliament is going to have a debate about these things, again it's not hard to come to the conclusion the kind of folk who ought to be taking part in the debate at various levels.
  • SandemaniacSandemaniac Shipmate
    Off the top of my head - not even thinking about it, never mind looking them up - I can name at least four representatives of the majority party that I know are from non-white & ethnic minority backgrounds, so there must be a number more, and frankly I am flabbergasted that not only did not one of them speak but that they do not seem to have complained about this. It looks to me as though the party line is to whitewash over racism, with the apparent approval of the members most likely to be affected, which... well, I'm at a loss.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited 11:13AM
    Telford wrote: »
    Priti by name, but with a soul as ugly as sin.
    That's a very unpleasant comment.

    Yes, but is it inaccurate?

    I know(well, in cyberspace) some people who are adherents of critical race theory, and they argue that it is always wrong to make fun of non-anglo names, including just by punning, even if the overall context isn't racist.

    And from what I know of their beliefs, they would NOT make exceptions for situations where the person bearing the non-anglo name was herself a right-wing racist.

    (And I'm honestly undecided about all this. On the one hand, I don't really see a problem if eg. someone who opposed NATO's Libyan campaign were to call the then-POTUS "Barack O-bomb-er", even though the parodied name is non-anglo. On the other hand, something about "Priti ugly" just sorta feels worse to me. Maybe because it's more the sort of thing I could imagine being used as a schoolyard taunt. YMMV.)
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited 11:13AM
    Delete
  • I don't know if there's a list of MPs who asked to speak - I know that Marsha de Cordova had asked to speak because she has been among those complaining that there were no black MPs selected to speak. The selection is random, with those who selected to speak (and, I believe, the order) drawn by lots from those who ask. But, the Speaker also has discretion to partially overrule that ballot and select MPs to speak. I'd say that the system needs reform - my preference would be that any MP wanting to speak in a debate submits an abstract of what they would say to the Speaker and the selection of who speaks is determined by using that to include the widest possible range of opinions, and where appropriate there's a bias towards particular expertise and experience (in this case, prioritising contributions from BAME MPs). Or, at least for parties to coordinate their own MPs to achieve a similar result (eg: Labour could have encouraged their BAME MPs to put their names in the pot while discouraging white MPs from doing so, thus increasing the chances of BAME MPs being drawn).
  • la vie en rougela vie en rouge Circus Host, 8th Day Host
    stetson wrote: »
    (And I'm honestly undecided about all this. On the one hand, I don't really see a problem if eg. someone who opposed NATO's Libyan campaign were to call the then-POTUS "Barack O-bomb-er", even though the parodied name is non-anglo. On the other hand, something about "Priti ugly" just sorta feels worse to me. Maybe because it's more the sort of thing I could imagine being used as a schoolyard taunt. YMMV.)

    "Ugly" for Priti Patel feels off to me because it is both racist and above all sexist. While the name may be intended as a slight on her character rather than her face, women in public life are so routinely judged on their looks that it's hard not to hear it that way IMO.
  • SojournerSojourner Shipmate
    Indeed. Likely Ms Patel gets so much flak because female MPs are expected to “play nice” ( exception being the departed grocer’s daughter from Grantham, may she rot in purgatory)
  • Priti Patel gets so much flak on this issue because she described the English football team taking the knee before matches as gesture politics and she supported the right of fans to boo (link to i-news story), and because she's currently putting in place some legislation to place asylum seekers off shore to process (link to Guardian story) and charges against migrants "knowingly" arriving in the UK without permission (link to story), basically enacting legislation that would have prevented her parents from immigrating here.
  • SojournerSojourner Shipmate
    No surprises there; children are notoriously ungrateful
Sign In or Register to comment.