BBC Eric Gill paedo statue attacked

[maomao]

Bit the other way round surely, hard to believe a paedophile's representation of a naked prepubescent form is a bit of innocent whimsy when it very much resembles a child.

Ariel is not usually represented as a child. It's fair enough to interpret Ariel in any way an artist wants but that interpretation will always carry a meaning, that's how art works. And here. a known paedophile has chosen to interpret Ariel as a naked child grasping a large phallic object while being held by an adult male. The idea that it's somehow innocent because it's art is laughable; it's offensive precisely because it's art.

 

[Yossarian]

Bit the other way round surely, hard to believe a paedophile's representation of a naked prepubescent form is a bit of innocent whimsy when it very much resembles a child.

Yep, I don't think Gill deserves to get the benefit of the doubt after fucking his sisters, his daughters, and his dog

 

[kenny g]

I stopped paying my licence fee after that sick Brand "prank" call and they and their Capita stooges have agreed they will never enter the curtilage of my property without a Court warrant. They have also agreed they will never contact me with any reference whatsoever to intended enforcement action or visits.

It is a grotesque arrogant organisation who are acting true to form in choosing to restore a giant paedo monument.

 

[tim]

I disagree with this. As an institution they’ve covered up not only their own nonces, including those who’ve not yet been exposed, but also as state media have turned a blind eye to the ones in the rest of the establishment.

I can think of very few organisations where sexual abuse hasn't been covered up, including: schools, sports clubs, religious groups, political parties of all stripes and trade unions. It's not just the "establishment", "Grooming Gangs", priests, or Bowie and Glitter. Turning a blind eye has been the norm not the exception. It's us not just them who have turned a blind eye.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

All this 'it's a work of art, it should be in a museum' stuff, are people looking at a completely different statue? It's fucking foul. It'd still be foul even if the sculptor wasn't a nonce.

Given that he was a nonce though, artistic merit shouldn't even be a consideration. All power to the people trying to smash it. Whatever their motivations, the act itself is just and necessary.

It should be toppled Colston/Saddam style and then dumped in a rubbish tip.

 

[kenny g]

I can think of very few organisations where sexual abuse hasn't been covered up, including: schools, sports clubs, religious groups, political parties of all stripes and trade unions. It's not just the "establishment", "Grooming Gangs", priests, or Bowie and Glitter. Turning a blind eye has been the norm not the exception. It's us not just them who have turned a blind eye.

Well, I'm not in the process of restoring a giant paedo statue displayed at the front of my house.

 

[tim]

Well, I'm not in the process of restoring a giant paedo statue displayed at the front of my house.

And I hope you wouldn't have a mural of David Bowie painted on your gable wall, but there are plenty of posters here who lionise him despite him being an abuser.

Do a search of the threads with his name in the title, if you want confirmation or check how angry people get with Spymaster whenever he challenges the consensus.

 

[kenny g]

And I hope you wouldn't have a mural of David Bowie painted on your gable wall, but there are plenty of posters here who lionise him despite him being an abuser.

Do a search of the threads with his name in the title, if you want confirmation or check how angry people get with Spymaster whenever he challenges the consensus.

Pure whataboutery. Please don't attempt to derail in such a cack handed manner.

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

And I hope you wouldn't have a mural of David Bowie painted on your gable wall, but there are plenty of posters here who lionise him despite him being an abuser.

The hypothetical mural not created by David Bowie and not depicting child abuse - therefore not the same thing.

 

[A380]

I disagree with this. As an institution they’ve covered up not only their own nonces, including those who’ve not yet been exposed, but also as state media have turned a blind eye to the ones in the rest of the establishment.

So, like teachers then? Only some are nonces, but the vast majority through history have, and continue, to cover for nonces.

 

[krtek a houby]

Artists, entertainers, pop stars, comics, presenters, actors, writers, the whole bloody lot.

This is why art and entertainment is immoral and degenerate and society would be better off without it.

 

[A380]

Artists, entertainers, pop stars, comics, presenters, actors, writers, the whole bloody lot.

This is why art and entertainment is immoral and degenerate and society would be better off without it.

And bring back the ban on Christmas too.

 

[krtek a houby]

View attachment 375572

And bring back the ban on Christmas too.

It's what dour lord jesus would want

 

[tim]

The hypothetical mural not created by David Bowie and not depicting child abuse - therefore not the same thing.

No just a hypothetical mural of an artist and abuser for whom unlike Gill, many posting here have a soft spot. However, there is an actual mural of Bowie in Brixton which maomao could deface if he felt the urge.

As to kenny g 's concern about "Whataboutery" derailing the thread, firstly most threads here go of on all sorts of tangents; and my experience tells me that the term "Whataboutery" is popular with those who don't want a discussion to go in a direction of which they disapprove.

'I wouldn’t want this for anybody’s daughter': will #MeToo kill off the rock'n'roll groupie?

Male rock stars of the 1970s and 80s were often notorious for sleeping with young female fans. Now women are starting to see those encounters in a very different light

www.theguardian.com

 

[kenny g]

As to kenny g 's concern about "Whataboutery" derailing the thread, firstly most threads here go of on all sorts of tangents; and my experience tells me that the term "Whataboutery" is popular with those who don't want a discussion to go in a direction of which they disapprove.

Bore off. I wasn't aware of and wouldn't've been interested in the other thread so don't try to drag this topic into something it isn't.

 

[kabbes]

Where are we at with this now? Gill’s statue is okay because David Bowie something something?

 

[tim]

Where are we at with this now? Gill’s statue is okay because David Bowie something something?

No, Gill and Bowie were both abusers. Given that, I don't think either the statue (or what is left of it) by one or the mural depicting the other can be said to be okay.

kenny g, if you don't like my posts block me, because I'm not going to take instruction from you about what I should or shouldn't say.

 

[xenon]

.

 

[Rob Ray]

Where are we at with this now? Gill’s statue is okay because David Bowie something something?

Pissing on the grave: Allowable.
Defacing easily available examples of their works (scribbling over Gill Sans or an old album cover): Mild threat to free speech but just about alright as long as you do it at home and don't film yourself.
Defacing unique examples of their works: A violation of our shared history which will only be forgiven in a couple of generations' time when the people who self-identified with their work are all safely dead.
Keyword Statue: You are the real monster.

 

[savoloysam]

Wait, what, David Bowie was an abuser? Please tell me this isn't so

 

[ouirdeaux]

Pissing on the grave: Allowable.

Even if it disturbs the dancers?

 

[SpookyFrank]

So, like teachers then? Only some are nonces, but the vast majority through history have, and continue, to cover for nonces.

We have a legal obligation to protect children from abuse and are very often the first people to act in cases where children are being abused. We are also obliged to teach kids the facts and skills they will need to protect themselves from abusers. Almost uniquely, we can be held criminally responsible for safeguarding failures.

Being a professional with that kind of responsibility, rather than some sad little controversialist prick, I won't go into detail about exactly why I'm especially unwilling to tolerate this kind of bullshit at this moment in time. Suffice to say if you had even 1% of a clue of what the fuck you're on about, and 1% of a shred of decency, you'd keep this kind of shit to your fucking self.

 

[Rob Ray]

Even if it disturbs the dancers?

Wait your turn in line and remember to be wearing wellies.

 

[tim]

Wait, what, David Bowie was an abuser? Please tell me this isn't so

Lori Maddox.

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

No just a hypothetical mural of an artist and abuser for whom unlike Gill, many posting here have a soft spot. However, there is an actual mural of Bowie in Brixton which maomao could deface if he felt the urge.

As to kenny g 's concern about "Whataboutery" derailing the thread, firstly most threads here go of on all sorts of tangents; and my experience tells me that the term "Whataboutery" is popular with those who don't want a discussion to go in a direction of which they disapprove.

'I wouldn’t want this for anybody’s daughter': will #MeToo kill off the rock'n'roll groupie?

Male rock stars of the 1970s and 80s were often notorious for sleeping with young female fans. Now women are starting to see those encounters in a very different light

www.theguardian.com

well if you can't respond to my point other than continue your whataboutery then I don't see why i should engage with you.

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

kenny g, if you don't like my posts block me, because I'm not going to take instruction from you about what I should or shouldn't say.

OK - you're on ignore for being unable to argue in good faith.

 

[Pickman's model]

We have a legal obligation to protect children from abuse and are very often the first people to act in cases where children are being abused. We are also obliged to teach kids the facts and skills they will need to protect themselves from abusers. Almost uniquely, we can be held criminally responsible for safeguarding failures.

Being a professional with that kind of responsibility, rather than some sad little controversialist prick, I won't go into detail about exactly why I'm especially unwilling to tolerate this kind of bullshit at this moment in time. Suffice to say if you had even 1% of a clue of what the fuck you're on about, and 1% of a shred of decency, you'd keep this kind of shit to your fucking self.

I think someone's nicked a380's login, his posts have changed for the worse recently

 

[Pickman's model]

Wait, what, David Bowie was an abuser? Please tell me this isn't so

I could. But it'd be a lie

 

[A380]

We have a legal obligation to protect children from abuse and are very often the first people to act in cases where children are being abused. We are also obliged to teach kids the facts and skills they will need to protect themselves from abusers. Almost uniquely, we can be held criminally responsible for safeguarding failures.

Being a professional with that kind of responsibility, rather than some sad little controversialist prick, I won't go into detail about exactly why I'm especially unwilling to tolerate this kind of bullshit at this moment in time. Suffice to say if you had even 1% of a clue of what the fuck you're on about, and 1% of a shred of decency, you'd keep this kind of shit to your fucking self.
[/

We have a legal obligation to protect children from abuse and are very often the first people to act in cases where children are being abused. We are also obliged to teach kids the facts and skills they will need to protect themselves from abusers. Almost uniquely, we can be held criminally responsible for safeguarding failures.

Being a professional with that kind of responsibility, rather than some sad little controversialist prick, I won't go into detail about exactly why I'm especially unwilling to tolerate this kind of bullshit at this moment in time. Suffice to say if you had even 1% of a clue of what the fuck you're on about, and 1% of a shred of decency, you'd keep this kind of shit to your fucking self.

So we aren’t allowed to discuss historic and ongoing abuse by teachers and the way that profession has historically closed ranks to protect those abusers?

Ok fair enough.

 

[kabbes]

No, Gill and Bowie were both abusers. Given that, I don't think either the statue (or what is left of it) by one or the mural depicting the other can be said to be okay.

I neither know nor care about any mural. This is a thread about the statue made by Gill, and I would rather it was removed. There are a zillion other bad things in the world, but I don’t need them all to be fixed at the same time.