[Livia]

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

I don't disagree with you, however I still believe him singling out a particular disabled child to mock, is not on.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't disagree with you, however I still believe him singling out a particular disabled child to mock, is not on.

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

I agree but then most actual celebrities are famous for music or film or TV or whatever, her whole "act" is being a camera ***** and having her life on display.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

The line has to be drawn between making a joke that certain people can laugh with together and singling people out to be laughed AT. It's a fine line but very different.
And when it comes to that there most certainly needs to be boundaries.

When a disabled child is laughed at, and people say he "****s his mother" then I say ******* "free" speech.

You'd willingly give up your rights so that comedians can't make jokes that might offend someone?

Sorry but that's HILARIOUS, foolish but hilarious.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Its good to laugh at people and if they are in no position to physically injure you then it becomes very funny.

This is why Ricky is not doing a skit on thick black bodybuilders or MMA stars

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Its good to laugh at people and if they are in no position to physically injure you then it becomes very funny.

This is why Ricky is not doing a skit on thick black bodybuilders or MMA stars

Yeah, no comedian has ever gone after muscle heads or fighters, have they?


What?


Oh.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ

Yeah, no comedian has ever gone after muscle heads or fighters, have they?


What?


Oh.

If there has been a bodybuilding or MMA sitcom I must have missed it?

maybe they show it in your wing but not on normal tv?

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

If there has been a bodybuilding or MMA sitcom I must have missed it?

maybe they show it in your wing but not on normal tv?

A skit, as you mentioned in your original post, is a sketch or a short piece, it's not a whole sitcom.

Jokes venture in to all aspects of life, and MMA, bodybuilders haven't been excluded from this for fear that comedians may get their heads kicked in.

It says more about your image of bodybuilders, as feared and respected members of society, rather than drugged up, self loathing vanity projects that I believe them to be.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

Originally Posted by Livia

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

I absolutely detest Katie Price and everything that she stands for but that's no excuse for comments to be made in a public arena claiming her disabled son has sex with her, in order to attract laughter and "favour".

In this case, why should the mother "take some of the responsibility"?
Yes, Katie Price has given her kids a level of fame at a very young age but that's pretty much irrelevant to what Boyle did.
That's like saying, you're a kid in the playground and therefore you must take some of the responsibility for being bullied by an older kid. Illogical.

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't disagree with you, however I still believe him singling out a particular disabled child to mock, is not on.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You'd willingly give up your rights so that comedians can't make jokes that might offend someone?

Sorry but that's HILARIOUS, foolish but hilarious.

Did I say that? No.

You were talking about everyone having the right of "free speech" and there being no boundaries to comedy.
I suggested when comedy (ie. Comedians broadcasting to a larger arena, TV, radio and DVDs) crosses the line like the likes of Boyle's comments there is some kind of boundary needed. Which channel 4 thankfully (or was it BBC) understood and reprimanded the spineless twerp.

Yes, hilarious isn't it?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

I absolutely detest Katie Price and everything that she stands for but that's no excuse for comments to be made in a public arena claiming her disabled son has sex with her, in order to attract laughter and "favour".

In this case, why should the mother "take some of the responsibility"?
Yes, Katie Price has given her kids a level of fame at a very young age but that's pretty much irrelevant to what Boyle did.
That's like saying, you're a kid in the playground and therefore you must take some of the responsibility for being bullied by an older kid. Illogical.




Agreed.




Did I say that? No.

You were talking about everyone having the right of "free speech" and there being no boundaries to comedy.
I suggested when comedy (ie. Comedians broadcasting to a larger arena, TV, radio and DVDs) crosses the line like the likes of Boyle's comments there is some kind of boundary needed. Which channel 4 thankfully (or was it BBC) understood and reprimanded the spineless twerp.

Yes, hilarious isn't it?

So you don't want Free Speech then, that is hilarious.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

It's a little rich you asking ME for evidence, when you're basing your whole opinion and your moral outrage on a show that hasn't even been aired yet.

No I'm not, all I asked was for an opinion....If you don't have one fine.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ

Because there is a difference between being clever, and having a stick continually wedged up your arse about every little thing. An ability to poke fun at people and situations, doesn't detract from intelligence.

Are you suggesting my concern is unjustified?....

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

I didn't actually see the Frankie Boyle thing..or know exactly what was said..but it seems that it was personal..a specific child..and also the fact that it was a child..who is classed as 'vulnerable'..I mean children in general are vulnerable

The disabled are also classed as vulnerable, I thought you would know that ammi.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

So you don't want Free Speech then, that is hilarious.

I believe TV and other broadcastable "comedy" akin to Frankie Boyles comment from above needs to be controlled.

But, you just put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5. Whatever.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

So you have no idea what was said by Frankie Boyle, and yet you seem to be suggesting that the comments he made regarding her disabled son she is somehow responsible for?.....
Is that what you are saying livia, or am I reading this wrong?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

I believe TV and other broadcastable "comedy" akin to Frankie Boyles comment from above needs to be controlled.

But, you just put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5. Whatever.

Why should it be controlled? Is simply not watching it not enough for you? Must you dictate what other people watch just because it offends your delicate sensibilities? What gives you that right?

I don't like either of them but there's no point in censoring them just because a bunch of busybodies want to control other people's viewing habbits. What you're proposing is quite simply limiting free speech at the end of the day and it's ridiculous considering why you want to do so, it's just so pointless to get worked up over it.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

How about the beckhams...tom cruise... madonnas kids?....
Stop trying to justify it , it's pathetic.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

So you don't want Free Speech then, that is hilarious.

Stop taking comments out of context. If you don't agree with the opinion fine don't misquote people its uncalled for.
Just be gracious enough to except some have their reasons for their view.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kizzy

How about the beckhams...tom cruise... madonnas kids?....
Stop trying to justify it , it's pathetic.

She doesn't have to justify anything you're the one being self righteous and judging her for the HEINOUS crime of thinking differently to you.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Why should it be controlled? Is simply not watching it not enough for you? Must you dictate what other people watch just because it offends your delicate sensibilities? What gives you that right?

I don't like either of them but there's no point in censoring them just because a bunch of busybodies want to control other people's viewing habbits. What you're proposing is quite simply limiting free speech at the end of the day and it's ridiculous considering why you want to do so, it's just so pointless to get worked up over it.

Delicate sensibilities? I'm not going to be made to look strange by you because I don't like to vulnerable people (kids mainly) being ridiculed on TV for a cheap laugh.

Would you just shrug it off if he claimed your son shags his own mother?
Channel 4 agrees by reprimanding him and issuing apologies. They already don't allow a certain level of material onto TV anyway so I don't know what you're on about. Would you say it's acceptable for racist jokes to be thrown about without concern because it's free speech?
It's not about different tastes in viewing habits it's drawing a line between comedy and forms of bullying.

I'm not getting worked up, I've given my opinion and people like yourself are questioning it and so I've elaborated.

I've said my peace, and explained/repeated myself several times, I'm leaving it at that.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

She doesn't have to justify anything you're the one being self righteous and judging her for the HEINOUS crime of thinking differently to you.

Don't exaggerate...
I'm entitled to my opinion, as are you. Difference is I'm not the one jumping to bizarre conclusions...

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kizzy

Stop taking comments out of context. If you don't agree with the opinion fine don't misquote people its uncalled for.
Just be gracious enough to except some have their reasons for their view.

I'm not taking it out of context, he said that comedy should be controlled right? Given that stand up comedy usually consists of view and opinions presented in a comedic fashion it would be a restriction of free speech to try and censor it no? He wants to have his cake and eat it and you can't do that with free speech it's either free or it isn't.

I'm going to challenge people's points Kizzy, especially when they're as...short sighted as some presented in this topic.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Delicate sensibilities? I'm not going to be made to look strange by you because I don't like to vulnerable people (kids mainly) being ridiculed on TV for a cheap laugh.

Would you just shrug it off if he claimed your son shags his own mother?
Channel 4 agrees by reprimanding him and issuing apologies. They already don't allow a certain level of material onto TV anyway so I don't know what you're on about. Would you say it's acceptable for racist jokes to be thrown about without concern because it's free speech?
It's not about different tastes in viewing habits it's drawing a line between comedy and forms of bullying.

I'm not getting worked up, I've given my opinion and people like yourself are questioning it and so I've elaborated.

I've said my peace, and explained/repeated myself several times, I'm leaving it at that.

Welcome to my world....

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I'm not taking it out of context, he said that comedy should be controlled right? Given that stand up comedy usually consists of view and opinions presented in a comedic fashion it would be a restriction of free speech to try and censor it no? He wants to have his cake and eat it and you can't do that with free speech it's either free or it isn't.

I'm going to challenge people's points Kizzy, especially when they're as...short sighted as some presented in this topic.

I'm talking about television broadcasting, not people on the street, in comedy clubs as that can't be "controlled".

If the "control" manages to stop so called comedians using young defenceless kids as comic fodder by declaring they must shag their mothers then so be it.

Have my cake and eat it? What are you talking about?
You're taking an opinion I have about TV broadcasting, which seems to mostly already be in effect mostly and acting as though I'm in support of martial law or something.