Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2013 15:29:28 GMT
The Citizen" just keeps getting better and better. Today's paper has devoted most of page 9 to recollections of Margaret Thatcher. So, what was one of her most important characteristics? According to the claim by Peter Arnold, repeated in truncated form as the headline for the article, it was that "she was much prettier than she looked in photographs and she had beautiful clear skin." Oh, give me strength! If Thatcher had been male, would looks have been considered important? Whether you loved or loathed her, it shouldn't have mattered whether she was pretty. This is still one of the ways in which women are judged. No-one objected to Winston Churchill on the grounds that he was short and fat. The majority of our prime ministers have been unprepossessing, to say the least, but that wasn't considered relevant in the past. Maybe it is partly a change in culture, whereby we now vote for good-looking people and ignore their abilities or integrity. I notice that Richard Graham has deliberately misunderstood the meaning of 'Great Britain' in order to repeat the tired claim that Thatcher put the Great back into Britain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2013 14:38:15 GMT
I see that supporters of Margaret Thatcher are now demanding that the BBC ban the song "Ding Dong: the Witch is Dead" because detractors have taken it up as an anthem against Thatcher. Oh really, some people in politics seem to have very thin skins. Which other songs will they want banned next? I can see "Maggie May" being used in a similar way, with people telling a dead woman to "Wake up Maggie, I think I've got something to say to you." There must be literally dozens of songs with the name Maggie or Margaret in them or referring to a witch; many of them could be interpreted in some way that would be insulting to Maggie Thatcher. Once you start banning songs because someone finds them offensive, it's a very slippery slope.
|
|
|
Post by Joe K on Apr 13, 2013 19:36:57 GMT
I do think the BBC have taken the wrong line with this, Kay (but then, when have they not?).
If it was up to me, I'd play the entire 51 seconds, but first ask people to think about what they'd done. Seriously, as far as explaining the context goes, I would say that the track was being played because a number of people thought it was big and clever to mock an old lady's death, and we simply have to humour that because we live in a free society.
After all, there's going to be plenty of pomp and circumstance coming out of the Beeb for Margaret Thatcher, so is a minute, two minutes tops, really going to hurt anyone, bar those delightful individuals, maybe? It's a bleeding chart show, after all...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2013 17:11:22 GMT
The complainants really fed the flames of the internet campaign. If it hadn't been for the media banging on about the furore (or 'ding dong', as they termed it), most of us would never have even known about the song or its significance. When it comes to such a campaign, there is literally no such thing as bad publicity.
One foolish thing that John Selwyn Gummer said about Thatcher during the parliamentary speeches was that: "She had beautiful hands and lovely ankles, and she knew precisely how to use both." We're back to "prettier than her photos" territory again. Gummer will always be remembered best for force-feeding his daughter with BSE-burger, but now perhaps he can also be remembered for his love of Thatcher's hands and ankles.
|
|