Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying “Men!” folk
5 views
Skip to first unread message
RH
Apr 17, 2013, 3:20:31 PM4/17/13
to
The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying “Men!” folk
Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
Robert Henderson
The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
or moral decorum never pathetic).
In recent weeks the dissatisfaction with men of the crazed feminists
who control the programme has reached new levels of intensity and
scope. Everywhere in the fictional village female characters are
treating their menfolk with a disdain and lack of consideration
unusual by the very high standards of contempt and condescension they
normally display towards them. This feminine misbehaviour is of course
not misbehaviour at all in feminist eyes but female “empowerment”.
Brenda Tucker has given her long-time live in boyfriend Tom Archer the
old heave-ho for the high-octane feminist reasons that (1) she wants
to follow her own career and (2) is determined not to have children.
The announcement of this opened the way for the script writers to have
Tom trying to blub his way to getting her back and sundry female
characters saying how understandable it was.
Chris Carter, who was recently in intensive care after having an
accident due to his being upset about his wife Alice being selected
for a job in Canada and expecting him to drop his own business as a
farrier to join him there on spec, is still in recovery mode. Nothing
daunted in the feminist selfishness stakes, Alice spent weeks during
his recovery still thinking about going to Canada before eventually
deciding against emigrating – for the moment.
Lillian Bellamy’s excruciating geriatric affair with the overtly
ineffably wet Paul has hit a rocky patch with Paul revealing more and
more of his distinctly sinister side with possessiveness and
pettishness alternating, while Lillian continues to show no remorse
about betraying her live in partner Matt Crawford.
Darrell Makepeace and his Albanian wife are at odds over Darrell’s
inability to get regular work and is even more concerned over what he
is doing to bring in the money he does bring in. Darrell being white,
English and working-class is fair game for misbehaviour to be
allotted to him. He arrived in the series with a prison sentence
behind him and has now been plonked into a storyline which has him
caught up in a dog-fighting ring which is where he is getting his
money from.
Pip Archer, arguably the most irritating female character ever to hit
the airwaves, is permanently in a rage with her father David for
daring to expect her to help about the family farm whilst she is
living there rent and board free while she is at university.
But it has not quite been all feminist abuse of men. Helen Archer,
replete with child obtained through artificial insemination from an
unknown donor, is dating again in the manner of a 15 year-old. Nothing
disastrous has happened yet but this being Helen it will., And
needless to say, she and the other main female characters will be
saying “Men!”
On the Everyday story of disabled folk front, the Downs child Bethany
born to Mike and Vicky Tucker when Mike is in his sixties and she in
here forties, is now greeted with cries of joy by every Archers’
character. This week the “normalisation of disability” in Ambridge
took another step forward with the local WI putting on a talk given by
a mother and her adult age Downs son. This was of course greeted with
universal praise.
Finally, the introduction of the Muslim character Iftikar Khan into
the Archers core family has been at least temporarily delayed. An
attempted kiss and embrace between the Chatelaine of lower Loxley
Elizabeth Pargetter and Khan resulted in a rebuff, gentle of course,
from Elizabeth, that she was “Not quite ready for a relationship”. But
diversity lovers should not fear. It is only a matter of time. Indeed,
the white, English characters are already preparing the ground .
When gossip about a romance was developing between Khan and Elizabeth,
a number of them talked about it without batting an eyelid at the
prospect of a Muslim ending up as the squire of an English country
estate with doubtless the patter of tiny feet from the a Mohammed or
Fatima or two. Will Elizabeth have to convert to Islam is the big
question.
Truly amazing what the BBC thinks goes on in an English farming
village.
Read more at http://englandcalling.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-archers-an-everyday-story-of-simple-feminists-saying-men-folk/
Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
Robert Henderson
The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
or moral decorum never pathetic).
In recent weeks the dissatisfaction with men of the crazed feminists
who control the programme has reached new levels of intensity and
scope. Everywhere in the fictional village female characters are
treating their menfolk with a disdain and lack of consideration
unusual by the very high standards of contempt and condescension they
normally display towards them. This feminine misbehaviour is of course
not misbehaviour at all in feminist eyes but female “empowerment”.
Brenda Tucker has given her long-time live in boyfriend Tom Archer the
old heave-ho for the high-octane feminist reasons that (1) she wants
to follow her own career and (2) is determined not to have children.
The announcement of this opened the way for the script writers to have
Tom trying to blub his way to getting her back and sundry female
characters saying how understandable it was.
Chris Carter, who was recently in intensive care after having an
accident due to his being upset about his wife Alice being selected
for a job in Canada and expecting him to drop his own business as a
farrier to join him there on spec, is still in recovery mode. Nothing
daunted in the feminist selfishness stakes, Alice spent weeks during
his recovery still thinking about going to Canada before eventually
deciding against emigrating – for the moment.
Lillian Bellamy’s excruciating geriatric affair with the overtly
ineffably wet Paul has hit a rocky patch with Paul revealing more and
more of his distinctly sinister side with possessiveness and
pettishness alternating, while Lillian continues to show no remorse
about betraying her live in partner Matt Crawford.
Darrell Makepeace and his Albanian wife are at odds over Darrell’s
inability to get regular work and is even more concerned over what he
is doing to bring in the money he does bring in. Darrell being white,
English and working-class is fair game for misbehaviour to be
allotted to him. He arrived in the series with a prison sentence
behind him and has now been plonked into a storyline which has him
caught up in a dog-fighting ring which is where he is getting his
money from.
Pip Archer, arguably the most irritating female character ever to hit
the airwaves, is permanently in a rage with her father David for
daring to expect her to help about the family farm whilst she is
living there rent and board free while she is at university.
But it has not quite been all feminist abuse of men. Helen Archer,
replete with child obtained through artificial insemination from an
unknown donor, is dating again in the manner of a 15 year-old. Nothing
disastrous has happened yet but this being Helen it will., And
needless to say, she and the other main female characters will be
saying “Men!”
On the Everyday story of disabled folk front, the Downs child Bethany
born to Mike and Vicky Tucker when Mike is in his sixties and she in
here forties, is now greeted with cries of joy by every Archers’
character. This week the “normalisation of disability” in Ambridge
took another step forward with the local WI putting on a talk given by
a mother and her adult age Downs son. This was of course greeted with
universal praise.
Finally, the introduction of the Muslim character Iftikar Khan into
the Archers core family has been at least temporarily delayed. An
attempted kiss and embrace between the Chatelaine of lower Loxley
Elizabeth Pargetter and Khan resulted in a rebuff, gentle of course,
from Elizabeth, that she was “Not quite ready for a relationship”. But
diversity lovers should not fear. It is only a matter of time. Indeed,
the white, English characters are already preparing the ground .
When gossip about a romance was developing between Khan and Elizabeth,
a number of them talked about it without batting an eyelid at the
prospect of a Muslim ending up as the squire of an English country
estate with doubtless the patter of tiny feet from the a Mohammed or
Fatima or two. Will Elizabeth have to convert to Islam is the big
question.
Truly amazing what the BBC thinks goes on in an English farming
village.
Read more at http://englandcalling.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-archers-an-everyday-story-of-simple-feminists-saying-men-folk/
Bill
Apr 17, 2013, 5:18:36 PM4/17/13
to
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying �Men!� folk
>Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
>Robert Henderson
>
>The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
you describe...
For goodness sake man, switch it off...
Then get out into English villages a bit more...
I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
wrote:
>The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying �Men!� folk
>Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
>Robert Henderson
>
>The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
you describe...
For goodness sake man, switch it off...
Then get out into English villages a bit more...
I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
DVH
Apr 18, 2013, 2:14:40 AM4/18/13
to
On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying �Men!� folk
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
>> Robert Henderson
>>
>> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>>
>
>
> I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>
> And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
> you describe...
>
> For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>
> Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>
> I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
> a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>
> There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
> North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
> about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>
> They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>
> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>
Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
>> Robert Henderson
>>
>> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>>
>
>
> I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>
> And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
> you describe...
>
> For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>
> Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>
> I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
> a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>
> There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
> North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
> about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>
> They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>
> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>
saracene
Apr 18, 2013, 3:51:52 AM4/18/13
to
On Apr 18, 7:14 am, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
> On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywhere...@gmail.com>
> On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >> The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying “Men!” folk
> >> Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
> >> Robert Henderson
>
> >> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
> >> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
> >> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
> >>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
> >> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
> > I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>
> > And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
> > you describe...
>
> > For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>
> > Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>
> > I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
> > a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>
> > There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
> > North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
> > about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>
> > They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>
> > Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>
> Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
It was originally devised as such a vehicle.
> >> Robert Henderson
>
> >> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
> >> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
> >> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
> >>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
> >> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
> > I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>
> > And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
> > you describe...
>
> > For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>
> > Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>
> > I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
> > a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>
> > There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
> > North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
> > about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>
> > They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>
> > Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>
> Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 5:07:25 AM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:14:40 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying �Men!� folk
>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:20:31 -0700 (PDT), RH <anywh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
>>> Robert Henderson
>>>
>>> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>>> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>>> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>>>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>>> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>>>
>>
>>
>> I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>>
>> And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
>> you describe...
>>
>> For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>>
>> Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>>
>> I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
>> a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>>
>> There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
>> North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
>> about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>>
>> They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>>
>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>
>
>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
That's a reasonable point of view, perhaps it needs Dr Who in a guest
>>> Robert Henderson
>>>
>>> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
>>> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
>>> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
>>>from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
>>> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>>>
>>
>>
>> I gave The Archers up after Nelson Gabriel died.
>>
>> And he was a sight more unlikely a character than anyone in there that
>> you describe...
>>
>> For goodness sake man, switch it off...
>>
>> Then get out into English villages a bit more...
>>
>> I don't think there's a North Yorkshire village hall that doesn't have
>> a Diwali Party these days, I went to two this year...
>>
>> There's also the Kerelite festival of Onum celebrated in at least one
>> North Yorkshire village hall because that's where a small colony of
>> about a hundred Kerelite medical staff (plus families) have settled...
>>
>> They come complete with a troup of temple dancers...
>>
>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>
>
>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
slot one week.
However Robert's argument is that it does not accurately reflect
English rural life because there's the odd brown face around the
village.
What he doesn't seem to realise is that the substantial Hindu medical
community have discovered the joys of English rural life and moved
there in reasonably large numbers.
Possibly because they don't meet bigots like him there...
JNugent
Apr 18, 2013, 6:20:07 AM4/18/13
to
(originally of farmers, of course).
"Masses" is a subjective word (especially in the context of Radio 4
listenership), but it is clear that those in charge of the media in
general are engaged in a campaign to normalise all sorts of abnormal things.
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 7:48:08 AM4/18/13
to
replaced in this country, and to not want to see the sort of
'enrichment' that is enjoyed in places like Handsworth, Alum Rock and
Bradford, etc. Thank goodness we have 'enlightened' people like you to
continue to show us the way.
Richard Tobin
Apr 18, 2013, 7:36:47 AM4/18/13
to
In article <at9vnu...@mid.individual.net>,
restraints imposed by millenia of government-imposed religion.
-- Richard
JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>"Masses" is a subjective word (especially in the context of Radio 4
>listenership), but it is clear that those in charge of the media in
>general are engaged in a campaign to normalise all sorts of abnormal things.
On the contrary, we're just beginning to throw off all the abnormal
>"Masses" is a subjective word (especially in the context of Radio 4
>listenership), but it is clear that those in charge of the media in
>general are engaged in a campaign to normalise all sorts of abnormal things.
restraints imposed by millenia of government-imposed religion.
-- Richard
Fevric J. Glandules
Apr 18, 2013, 8:35:49 AM4/18/13
to
Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:14:40 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>
>>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
>
> That's a reasonable point of view, perhaps it needs Dr Who in a guest
> slot one week.
Also originally intended to be educational...
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:14:40 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>
>>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
>
> That's a reasonable point of view, perhaps it needs Dr Who in a guest
> slot one week.
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 8:45:29 AM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:48:08 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:
You also misunderstand.
The wealthy immigrant community of South Asian origin is already
living in rural areas.
The Archers is starting to reflect this.
Your denial of this is your problem, but I'm afraid it can't really
be denied...
wrote:
The wealthy immigrant community of South Asian origin is already
living in rural areas.
The Archers is starting to reflect this.
Your denial of this is your problem, but I'm afraid it can't really
be denied...
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 8:47:18 AM4/18/13
to
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 9:58:29 AM4/18/13
to
as in virtually none - around here. I suppose I must also be a 'bigot'
for stating this (shrugs).
>
> The Archers is starting to reflect this.
output it projects and promotes the kind of world the vermin who run it
want to create.
>
> Your denial of this is your problem, but I'm afraid it can't really
> be denied...
'bigot' and 'racist' every time anyone expresses anything but the
standard liberal view.
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 10:14:19 AM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 14:58:29 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
Enough of them to be significant.
Certainly far more than is ever reflected in 'The Archers'.
>> Your denial of this is your problem, but I'm afraid it can't really
>> be denied...
>
>No, people like you are the problem. People who stand by poised to shout
>'bigot' and 'racist' every time anyone expresses anything but the
>standard liberal view.
But, as is reasonably obvious from your earlier comments, you are a
bigot.
You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
would just cease toe xist.
I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
Certainly far more than is ever reflected in 'The Archers'.
>> Your denial of this is your problem, but I'm afraid it can't really
>> be denied...
>
>No, people like you are the problem. People who stand by poised to shout
>'bigot' and 'racist' every time anyone expresses anything but the
>standard liberal view.
bigot.
You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
would just cease toe xist.
I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 10:41:33 AM4/18/13
to
>
> You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
> would just cease toe xist.
>
> I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
world that I live in - what's the matter didn't it fit your preferred
version?
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 4:41:24 PM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:41:33 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
Bollocks, you just got totaled...
>> You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
>> would just cease toe xist.
>>
>> I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
>
>Do you really? I see that you were careful to snip my description of the
>world that I live in - what's the matter didn't it fit your preferred
>version?
It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
areas.
>> You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
>> would just cease toe xist.
>>
>> I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
>
>Do you really? I see that you were careful to snip my description of the
>world that I live in - what's the matter didn't it fit your preferred
>version?
remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
areas.
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 5:00:25 PM4/18/13
to
you believe that it is achieved by shouting 'bigot' and calling it a
decisive argument?
>
>>> You're the one who wishes immigrants who have been here for decades
>>> would just cease toe xist.
>>>
>>> I live in the world as it is, not as I would like it to be.
>>
>> Do you really? I see that you were careful to snip my description of the
>> world that I live in - what's the matter didn't it fit your preferred
>> version?
>
> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
> areas.
stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
aspect. Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
DVH
Apr 18, 2013, 5:01:42 PM4/18/13
to
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 5:12:06 PM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:00:25 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:
Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
>out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
>of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
>many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
How far away is the nearest large hospital?
wrote:
>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>> areas.
>
>I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>aspect.
Because that's the one I know about.
>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>> areas.
>
>I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>aspect.
Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
>out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
>of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
>many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 5:14:34 PM4/18/13
to
As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community) they do what
the White British do and when they get rich they move to the
prosperous rural villages.
DVH
Apr 18, 2013, 5:29:47 PM4/18/13
to
On 18/04/2013 22:14, Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>
>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>> areas.
>>>
>>
>> It's not exactly common.
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>
> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>
> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
Wot a surprise.
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>
>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>> areas.
>>>
>>
>> It's not exactly common.
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>
> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>
> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
> they do what
> the White British do and when they get rich they move to the
> prosperous rural villages.
>
Clerkenwell only has a church now, and all the Little Italy immigranti
have dispersed to the suburbs and the home counties.
Meanwhile the Bangladeshis continue their backward ways in Bethnal Green
and Stepney.
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 5:48:24 PM4/18/13
to
On 18/04/2013 22:12, Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:00:25 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>> areas.
>>
>> I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>> stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>> aspect.
>
> Because that's the one I know about.
The one you think you know about, but clearly don't.
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:00:25 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>> areas.
>>
>> I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>> stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>> aspect.
>
> Because that's the one I know about.
>
> Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
>> out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
>> of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
>> many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
>
> How far away is the nearest large hospital?
lecturing us all about the ethnic composition of rural areas - telling
me that my experience of living in a very rural area 'wasn't relevant'
in the process - and now 'your' rural area must have a large hospital
nearby. Tell me again why my experience of rural areas in England isn't
relevant to a discussion about rural areas in England? And try and do so
without name-calling and dishonest snipping - which appears to be the
only way that you seem able to operate.
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 6:29:14 PM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:48:24 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:
>On 18/04/2013 22:12, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:00:25 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>> areas.
>>>
>>> I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>>> stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>>> aspect.
>>
>> Because that's the one I know about.
>
>The one you think you know about, but clearly don't.
>
>>
>> Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
>>> out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
>>> of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
>>> many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
>>
>> How far away is the nearest large hospital?
>
>Oh, so it's another little diversion is it.
Not if you use your brains...
>On 18/04/2013 22:12, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:00:25 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>> areas.
>>>
>>> I seem to recall that Robert raised several points about BBC
>>> stereotyping in the Archers, you chose to home in that particular
>>> aspect.
>>
>> Because that's the one I know about.
>
>The one you think you know about, but clearly don't.
>
>>
>> Be that as it may, why then was it not relevant for me to point
>>> out that I live in a very rural area (and I mean very rural, not a bit
>>> of green belt on the edge of a large conurbation) - and have done for
>>> many years - that what you describe just isn't the case?
>>
>> How far away is the nearest large hospital?
>
>Oh, so it's another little diversion is it.
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 6:39:43 PM4/18/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:29:47 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 18/04/2013 22:14, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>>
>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>> areas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not exactly common.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>>
>> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>>
>> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
>> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
>
>Wot a surprise.
Not really.
>On 18/04/2013 22:14, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>>
>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>> areas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not exactly common.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>>
>> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>>
>> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
>> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
>
>Wot a surprise.
The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
The Hindus go back further.
Gandhi was studying law at the Inner Temple before there was a mosque
built in England
>> they do what
>> the White British do and when they get rich they move to the
>> prosperous rural villages.
>>
>
>Just so.
>
>Clerkenwell only has a church now, and all the Little Italy immigranti
>have dispersed to the suburbs and the home counties.
>
>Meanwhile the Bangladeshis continue their backward ways in Bethnal Green
>and Stepney.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Bangladeshis don't.
With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
Farmer Giles
Apr 18, 2013, 7:00:11 PM4/18/13
to
Bill
Apr 18, 2013, 7:11:57 PM4/18/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:11 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
You're obviously in denial about the movement of a small but
significant number of South Asians into rural areas.
I wonder why...
significant number of South Asians into rural areas.
I wonder why...
Fevric J. Glandules
Apr 19, 2013, 5:46:53 AM4/19/13
to
Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:35:49 +0000 (UTC), "Fevric J. Glandules"
> <f...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Bill wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:14:40 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>>>
>>>>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
>>>
>>> That's a reasonable point of view, perhaps it needs Dr Who in a guest
>>> slot one week.
>>
>>Also originally intended to be educational...
>
> So was Dr Who...
What did you think I was referring to?
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:35:49 +0000 (UTC), "Fevric J. Glandules"
> <f...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Bill wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:14:40 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 17/04/2013 22:18, Bill wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps The Archers needs more Asian influence...
>>>>
>>>>Why? It's fiction, not documentary or a vehicle for influencing the masses.
>>>
>>> That's a reasonable point of view, perhaps it needs Dr Who in a guest
>>> slot one week.
>>
>>Also originally intended to be educational...
>
> So was Dr Who...
DVH
Apr 19, 2013, 12:34:08 PM4/19/13
to
On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:29:47 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 22:14, Bill wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>>> areas.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not exactly common.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>>>
>>> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>>>
>>> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
>>> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
>>
>> Wot a surprise.
>
> Not really.
>
> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:29:47 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 22:14, Bill wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:01:42 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/04/2013 21:41, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It certainly wasn't relevant to the argument, which was, if you
>>>>> remember, about wealthy people of South Asian origin living in rural
>>>>> areas.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's not exactly common.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/may/19/ethnic-breakdown-england-wales
>>>
>>> I know that, but it's a sight higher than it was a decade ago.
>>>
>>> As the South Asian community integrates (and the Hindu community seems
>>> to be integrating far faster than the Muslim community)
>>
>> Wot a surprise.
>
> Not really.
>
> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
of establishment.
>
> The Hindus go back further.
>
> Gandhi was studying law at the Inner Temple before there was a mosque
> built in England
>
>>> they do what
>>> the White British do and when they get rich they move to the
>>> prosperous rural villages.
>>>
>>
>> Just so.
>>
>> Clerkenwell only has a church now, and all the Little Italy immigranti
>> have dispersed to the suburbs and the home counties.
>>
>> Meanwhile the Bangladeshis continue their backward ways in Bethnal Green
>> and Stepney.
>
> I'll bet plenty of those listed here
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Bangladeshis don't.
>
> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
Bill
Apr 19, 2013, 2:48:30 PM4/19/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>
>You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>of establishment.
This seems to be the case.
The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
The single exception seems to the Normans...
>>
>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>
>You're an optimist.
Perhaps I meet more wealthy people from the ethnic and religious
minorities than you do.
Brown faces in village cricket teams are no longer a novelty...
>On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>
>You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>of establishment.
The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
The single exception seems to the Normans...
>>
>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>
>You're an optimist.
minorities than you do.
Brown faces in village cricket teams are no longer a novelty...
DVH
Apr 19, 2013, 2:57:29 PM4/19/13
to
On 19/04/2013 19:48, Bill wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>
>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>> of establishment.
>
> This seems to be the case.
>
> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
You were saying something about fastest.
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>
>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>> of establishment.
>
> This seems to be the case.
>
> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
>
> The single exception seems to the Normans...
>
>>>
>>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>>
>> You're an optimist.
>
> Perhaps I meet more wealthy people from the ethnic and religious
> minorities than you do.
>
> Brown faces in village cricket teams are no longer a novelty...
>
Bill
Apr 19, 2013, 3:20:09 PM4/19/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:57:29 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 19/04/2013 19:48, Bill wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>>
>>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>>
>>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>>> of establishment.
>>
>> This seems to be the case.
>>
>> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
>
>You were saying something about fastest.
Speeds vary.
>On 19/04/2013 19:48, Bill wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>>
>>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>>
>>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>>> of establishment.
>>
>> This seems to be the case.
>>
>> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
>
>You were saying something about fastest.
Sometimes because of prejudice.
Sometimes because of social inertia.
The Sephardic Jews took about a hundred and fifty years to become well
established.
The Indian Christian community took less than half a century and are
almost fully integrated now, far more so than the Jews...
>> Perhaps I meet more wealthy people from the ethnic and religious
>> minorities than you do.
>
>Doubtless. I meet human beings.
>> Brown faces in village cricket teams are no longer a novelty...
>>
>
>Oh, that's your idea of sophistication.
DVH
Apr 19, 2013, 3:29:46 PM4/19/13
to
On 19/04/2013 20:20, Bill wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:57:29 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19/04/2013 19:48, Bill wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>>>
>>>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>>>> of establishment.
>>>
>>> This seems to be the case.
>>>
>>> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
>>
>> You were saying something about fastest.
>
> Speeds vary.
>
> Sometimes because of prejudice.
>
> Sometimes because of social inertia.
>
> The Sephardic Jews took about a hundred and fifty years to become well
> established.
>
> The Indian Christian community took less than half a century and are
> almost fully integrated now, far more so than the Jews...
>
>>> Perhaps I meet more wealthy people from the ethnic and religious
>>> minorities than you do.
>>
>> Doubtless. I meet human beings.
>
> Define 'human beings' here please.
Primates of the family Hominidae.
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 19:57:29 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19/04/2013 19:48, Bill wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:34:08 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/04/2013 23:39, Bill wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>>>>
>>>> You appear to be suggesting that speed of integration depends on length
>>>> of establishment.
>>>
>>> This seems to be the case.
>>>
>>> The groups that have been here longest seem to have integrated best.
>>
>> You were saying something about fastest.
>
> Speeds vary.
>
> Sometimes because of prejudice.
>
> Sometimes because of social inertia.
>
> The Sephardic Jews took about a hundred and fifty years to become well
> established.
>
> The Indian Christian community took less than half a century and are
> almost fully integrated now, far more so than the Jews...
>
>>> Perhaps I meet more wealthy people from the ethnic and religious
>>> minorities than you do.
>>
>> Doubtless. I meet human beings.
>
> Define 'human beings' here please.
I approach a likely suspect and say "are you a primate of the family
Hominidae?"
They either say yes or they say no.
Then I say "are you a religious or effnic minority?", because those
things are very important to me. I need to know who to patronise and
make allowances for, you see.
Bill
Apr 19, 2013, 3:38:46 PM4/19/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 20:29:46 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 19/04/2013 20:20, Bill wrote:
>>> Doubtless. I meet human beings.
>>
>> Define 'human beings' here please.
>
>Primates of the family Hominidae.
>
>I approach a likely suspect and say "are you a primate of the family
>Hominidae?"
>
>They either say yes or they say no.
>
>Then I say "are you a religious or effnic minority?", because those
>things are very important to me. I need to know who to patronise and
>make allowances for, you see.
So...
You're a complete arsehole then...
>On 19/04/2013 20:20, Bill wrote:
>>> Doubtless. I meet human beings.
>>
>> Define 'human beings' here please.
>
>Primates of the family Hominidae.
>
>I approach a likely suspect and say "are you a primate of the family
>Hominidae?"
>
>They either say yes or they say no.
>
>Then I say "are you a religious or effnic minority?", because those
>things are very important to me. I need to know who to patronise and
>make allowances for, you see.
You're a complete arsehole then...
DVH
Apr 19, 2013, 3:47:47 PM4/19/13
to
giving you what you demand.
White Spirit
Apr 19, 2013, 6:08:27 PM4/19/13
to
On 18/04/13 23:39, Bill wrote:
> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
> The Hindus go back further.
Even so, among first and second generation Hindus, one tends to notice
> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
> The Hindus go back further.
different prevailing sensibilities and attitudes concerning people
outside their community compared to first and second generation Muslims.
> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
Bill
Apr 19, 2013, 6:23:17 PM4/19/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:08:27 +0100, White Spirit
<wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>On 18/04/13 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>
>> The Hindus go back further.
>
>Even so, among first and second generation Hindus, one tends to notice
>different prevailing sensibilities and attitudes concerning people
>outside their community compared to first and second generation Muslims.
I think that has a lot to do with their ideas about education coupled
<wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>On 18/04/13 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>> The Muslim community in the UK goes back only about 120 years.
>
>> The Hindus go back further.
>
>Even so, among first and second generation Hindus, one tends to notice
>different prevailing sensibilities and attitudes concerning people
>outside their community compared to first and second generation Muslims.
to religion.
Hindus do not particularly venerate religious education.
>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>
>That must explain the Saudi Sheikhs.
>
I imagine their degrees, almost all from distinguished US
universities, were granted in a similar manner to Saif al-Islam
Gaddafi's doctorate at LSE...
White Spirit
Apr 21, 2013, 11:53:10 AM4/21/13
to
Bill
Apr 21, 2013, 2:01:33 PM4/21/13
to
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:53:10 +0100, White Spirit
However some individuals do not conform to the trend because there is
no need for them to become educated to acquire a better standard of
living.
The Saudi royal family seems not to need to become educated...
<wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>On 19/04/13 23:23, Bill wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:08:27 +0100, White Spirit
>> <wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> On 18/04/13 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>>>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>
>>> That must explain the Saudi Sheikhs.
>
>> Education?
>
>> I imagine their degrees, almost all from distinguished US
>> universities, were granted in a similar manner to Saif al-Islam
>> Gaddafi's doctorate at LSE...
>
>You said that with money comes education...
>
>
In general terms, yes.
>On 19/04/13 23:23, Bill wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:08:27 +0100, White Spirit
>> <wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> On 18/04/13 23:39, Bill wrote:
>
>>>> With money comes education, with education comes sophistication...
>
>>> That must explain the Saudi Sheikhs.
>
>> Education?
>
>> I imagine their degrees, almost all from distinguished US
>> universities, were granted in a similar manner to Saif al-Islam
>> Gaddafi's doctorate at LSE...
>
>You said that with money comes education...
>
>
However some individuals do not conform to the trend because there is
no need for them to become educated to acquire a better standard of
living.
The Saudi royal family seems not to need to become educated...
HardySpicer
Apr 24, 2013, 12:53:59 AM4/24/13
to
HardySpicer
Apr 24, 2013, 12:55:21 AM4/24/13
to
On Apr 18, 7:20 am, RH <anywhere...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying “Men!” folk
> Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
> Robert Henderson
>
> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
> from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
> In recent weeks the dissatisfaction with men of the crazed feminists
> The Archers: an everyday story of simple feminists saying “Men!” folk
> Posted on April 17, 2013 by Robert Henderson
> Robert Henderson
>
> The white male characters in the Archers are invariably either louts
> or cringing wimps who are treated as children by the female
> characters. (ethnic minority male characters are of course exempted
> from this rule, being invariably middle-class and if not always models
> or moral decorum never pathetic).
>
> who control the programme has reached new levels of intensity and
> scope. Everywhere in the fictional village female characters are
> treating their menfolk with a disdain and lack of consideration
> unusual by the very high standards of contempt and condescension they
> normally display towards them. This feminine misbehaviour is of course
> not misbehaviour at all in feminist eyes but female “empowerment”.
>
> Brenda Tucker has given her long-time live in boyfriend Tom Archer the
> old heave-ho for the high-octane feminist reasons that (1) she wants
> to follow her own career and (2) is determined not to have children.
> The announcement of this opened the way for the script writers to have
> Tom trying to blub his way to getting her back and sundry female
> characters saying how understandable it was.
>
> Chris Carter, who was recently in intensive care after having an
> accident due to his being upset about his wife Alice being selected
> for a job in Canada and expecting him to drop his own business as a
> farrier to join him there on spec, is still in recovery mode. Nothing
> daunted in the feminist selfishness stakes, Alice spent weeks during
> his recovery still thinking about going to Canada before eventually
> deciding against emigrating – for the moment.
>
> Lillian Bellamy’s excruciating geriatric affair with the overtly
> ineffably wet Paul has hit a rocky patch with Paul revealing more and
> more of his distinctly sinister side with possessiveness and
> pettishness alternating, while Lillian continues to show no remorse
> about betraying her live in partner Matt Crawford.
>
> Darrell Makepeace and his Albanian wife are at odds over Darrell’s
> inability to get regular work and is even more concerned over what he
> is doing to bring in the money he does bring in. Darrell being white,
> English and working-class is fair game for misbehaviour to be
> allotted to him. He arrived in the series with a prison sentence
> behind him and has now been plonked into a storyline which has him
> caught up in a dog-fighting ring which is where he is getting his
> money from.
>
> Pip Archer, arguably the most irritating female character ever to hit
> the airwaves, is permanently in a rage with her father David for
> daring to expect her to help about the family farm whilst she is
> living there rent and board free while she is at university.
>
> But it has not quite been all feminist abuse of men. Helen Archer,
> replete with child obtained through artificial insemination from an
> unknown donor, is dating again in the manner of a 15 year-old. Nothing
> disastrous has happened yet but this being Helen it will., And
> needless to say, she and the other main female characters will be
> saying “Men!”
>
> On the Everyday story of disabled folk front, the Downs child Bethany
> born to Mike and Vicky Tucker when Mike is in his sixties and she in
> here forties, is now greeted with cries of joy by every Archers’
> character. This week the “normalisation of disability” in Ambridge
> took another step forward with the local WI putting on a talk given by
> a mother and her adult age Downs son. This was of course greeted with
> universal praise.
>
> Finally, the introduction of the Muslim character Iftikar Khan into
> the Archers core family has been at least temporarily delayed. An
> attempted kiss and embrace between the Chatelaine of lower Loxley
> Elizabeth Pargetter and Khan resulted in a rebuff, gentle of course,
> from Elizabeth, that she was “Not quite ready for a relationship”. But
> diversity lovers should not fear. It is only a matter of time. Indeed,
> the white, English characters are already preparing the ground .
> When gossip about a romance was developing between Khan and Elizabeth,
> a number of them talked about it without batting an eyelid at the
> prospect of a Muslim ending up as the squire of an English country
> estate with doubtless the patter of tiny feet from the a Mohammed or
> Fatima or two. Will Elizabeth have to convert to Islam is the big
> question.
>
> Truly amazing what the BBC thinks goes on in an English farming
> village.
>
> Read more athttp://englandcalling.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-archers-an-everyda...Ads not by this site
England calling. More incoherent delusions from the mental patient. He
probably thinks he is Lord Haw Haw or some such.
Still quite harmless at this stage though may need locking up in a
year or two if he gets worse.
Hardy
RH
Apr 24, 2013, 4:27:48 AM4/24/13
to
>
> England calling. More incoherent delusions from the mental patient. He
> probably thinks he is Lord Haw Haw or some such.
> Still quite harmless at this stage though may need locking up in a
> year or two if he gets worse.
>
> Hardy
Oh, the irony.... RH
> England calling. More incoherent delusions from the mental patient. He
> probably thinks he is Lord Haw Haw or some such.
> Still quite harmless at this stage though may need locking up in a
> year or two if he gets worse.
>
> Hardy
0 new messages