[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Actually the piece I posted is an update to this one.

I am really struggling with this, so the guy was interviewed and then reinterviewed, and does this happen regularly or was it a journalist looking for an angle who didn't get it first time round, or did the guy genuinely not find it offensive and then change his mind and why would he comment in the first instance if he didn't know what he was commenting on, it's all very strange

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I am really struggling with this, so the guy was interviewed and then reinterviewed, and does this happen regularly or was it a journalist looking for an angle who didn't get it first time round, or did the guy genuinely not find it offensive and then change his mind and why would he comment in the first instance if he didn't know what he was commenting on, it's all very strange

I think it was one comment and then a follow up after the controversy. My take on this is that there are two possibilities;

1) He initially didn't have an issue but hadn't given it much thought, and when certain aspects were pointed out he became genuinely less comfortable with them.

2) He didn't have a personal issue with it even after hearing other people's concerns, but the fact that other people WERE concerned was enough to make him change his statement for PR reasons.


Either way I honestly am not convinced that the opinion of any one person, Zulu or not, can be considered gospel in any situation. It's sort of meaningless whether he finds it OK or not... He's one person, and the idea that he speaks for an entire group just by virtue of being a member of that group is quite flawed. It doesn't indicate anything at all about the opinions of other members of that group.

I mean look at this forum / even this thread. There are a number of us Pale Stale Males here but it would obviously be nonsense to try to assume that all share the same opinion, when there are as many variations as members.

Of course, I'm not calling you a pale stale male Cherie. A pale well-febrezed female.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think it was one comment and then a follow up after the controversy. My take on this is that there are two possibilities;

1) He initially didn't have an issue but hadn't given it much thought, and when certain aspects were pointed out he became genuinely less comfortable with them.

2) He didn't have a personal issue with it even after hearing other people's concerns, but the fact that other people WERE concerned was enough to make him change his statement for PR reasons.


Either way I honestly am not convinced that the opinion of any one person, Zulu or not, can be considered gospel in any situation. It's sort of meaningless whether he finds it OK or not... He's one person, and the idea that he speaks for an entire group just by virtue of being a member of that group is quite flawed. It doesn't indicate anything at all about the opinions of other members of that group.

I mean look at this forum / even this thread. There are a number of us Pale Stale Males here but it would obviously be nonsense to try to assume that all share the same opinion, when there are as many variations as members.

Of course, I'm not calling you a pale stale male Cherie. A pale well-febrezed female.

Yeah I agree we do seem very hung up in this guy and his changeable opinion, Of course he doesn't speak for all Zulus anymore than I speak on behalf of the Irish nation, it's just a snapshot of opinion that the paper has run with to make a story, and it has served us very well here on TiBB, it's kept us wittering away for pages

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I speak on behalf of the Irish nation

Thats impossible anyway, as Niamh got the job ages ago.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I am really struggling with this, so the guy was interviewed and then reinterviewed, and does this happen regularly or was it a journalist looking for an angle who didn't get it first time round, or did the guy genuinely not find it offensive and then change his mind and why would he comment in the first instance if he didn't know what he was commenting on, it's all very strange

It's really not that hard, he did some further research into the 'tradition' and realised that he was not comfortable. Not sure how a journalist can influence a quote...