I wonder who appoints and manages the Civil Service?

I reckon the 'geezer' that does needs to be fired!

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 7:16 PM

Society's views on subjects will always be hypocritical. Cottaging is abhorrent but the mile high club is harmless fun, prostitution is disgusting but the escort services are glamorous, racial stereotyping is wrong unless you're in Little Britain...

View original

All of the things you mention above are abhorrent IMHO, but racial stereotyping in Little Britain? Little Britain is just a comedy program. Racial stereotyping in comedy isn't abhorrent unless it's designed to whip up racial hatred, for which you can now be sent to jail. I don't think racial hatred is on the agenda in Little Britain, is it? If it is, let's make a complaint and get them sent to jail by all means.

Real racial prejudice and race hate crime is abhorrent though, every time. The exponents of this need to go to jail and not pass go.

Aaron - the Tories are proposing 1,000 new prison places I believe. This is too few in my opinion, too few by a long way. Can you tip them the wink?

Vicky Pollard set back class tolerance a few steps and a character called Ting Tong hardly promotes cultural understanding. The fact that it's Richard Littlejohn's favourite programme is also an indication. I don't think that they're necessarily racist but these cultural points have widespread influence.

To be fair it may just be that I fookin well hate Little Britain, the cretinous catchphrase Kant's

Quote: Frankie Rage @ October 13, 2007, 7:45 PM

Aaron - the Tories are proposing 1,000 new prison places I believe. This is too few in my opinion, too few by a long way. Can you tip them the wink?

View original

If I had any influence, believe me I would. Need at least ten times that number.

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 7:51 PM

Vicky Pollard set back class tolerance a few steps and a character called Ting Tong hardly promotes cultural understanding. The fact that it's Richard Littlejohn's favourite programme is also an indication. I don't think that they're necessarily racist but these cultural points have widespread influence.

To be fair it may just be that I fookin well hate Little Britain, the cretinous catchphrase Kant's

View original

I am no fan of Little Britain. Without gay, transvestite and disabled gags, Little Britain has no act. What tripe! But I defend their right to do what they do.

Some of Little Britain was very well done in the early days, but it's still crass rubbish and will be viewed so in hindsight I expect. Little Britain are good performers though.

Why then, you'll support a tax raise?

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 7:51 PM

Vicky Pollard set back class tolerance a few steps

View original

Not at all. Shows in the vein of VV (wheey, we've come full circle!), Big Brother and the like did that far before Little Britain was even dreamt of.

Quote: Frankie Rage @ October 13, 2007, 7:59 PM

I am no fan of Catherine Tate or Little Britain. IMHO Catherine Tate over-acts like a third-rate and just isn't funny; and without gay, transvestite and disabled gags, Little Britain has no act. What tripe!

Some of Little Britain was very well done in the early days, but it's still crass rubbish and will be viewed so in hindsight I expect. I think the difference is though that Little Britain are good performers whereas Catherine Tate must have done a pact with the devil to get on telly. She is so third rate she is fourth rate.

Only my opinion of course and this is not hatred I'm whipping up here, just artistic criticism.

View original

A fair point, I've enjoyed Lucas and Walliams outside of their own writing. I suppose that I liked the first Little Britain but I was only young. It must be strange to know that your target audience shouldn't legally be watching your show.

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 7:59 PM

Why then, you'll support a tax raise?

View original

We don't need to raise the levels of taxation again. We need to realign where the money goes, and what it's spent on when it's there.

Sorry, I was just being antagonistic.

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 7:59 PM

Why then, you'll support a tax raise?

View original

As long as they spend it on prisons and put real criminals in there and in a proper way, i.e. locked up for a long time and not watching telly all day...

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 8:03 PM

Sorry, I was just being antagonistic.

View original

Not like you...

...or me...

I don't mind televisions in prisons (SWEET JESUS, IT RHYMES!) but I was amazed that a convicted and violent neo nazi had been allowed to watch Romper Stomper.

Quote: Aaron @ October 13, 2007, 8:02 PM

We don't need to raise the levels of taxation again. We need to realign where the money goes, and what it's spent on when it's there.

View original

Well said!

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 8:07 PM

I don't mind televisions in prisons (SWEET JESUS, IT RHYMES!) but I was amazed that a convicted and violent neo nazi had been allowed to watch Romper Stomper.

View original

I think watching TV is a priveledge and I would not let prisoners have that priveledge except that I would let them see BBC and ITV news, but no more, so they can keep abreast with what is happening in the World. Similarly access to some newspapers (not the Daily Sport, though...) and access to a (restricted) library.

Also, I would not let them fraternise with each other like they do now because the reality of this is that it just creates a breeding ground or 'university' of crime. It's too soft. It's morally wrong.

Prisoners need to work for their keep at least a normal working week and need to be closely supervised. The prison service is starved of funds with too few and the wrong sort of staff running the prisons (commercial contracors).

Bloody politicians again... getting it wrong seems to be their forte...

Hmmm...I know little of this situation, but I'd hope that they would be well treated or I somehow feel that it would drag us to their level. Besides, it would hardly help to rehabilitate them. I tend to agree when it comes to restriction, however, as if we're locking them away then we agree that they shouldn't influence society and society shouldn't influence them.

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 8:07 PM

I don't mind televisions in prisons (SWEET JESUS, IT RHYMES!) but I was amazed that a convicted and violent neo nazi had been allowed to watch Romper Stomper.

View original

Hadn't heard about that one, but quite. It's a good example of just where the prison service has gone wrong over the past few decades. When we get to a state where being in prison is more comfortable, more luxurious, and generally nicer than being outside, then there is something wrong (at both ends of the scale, before anyone says anything). We can't literally just lock 'em up, throw away the key and leave them to rot, but IMO prisoners are afforded far too many rights, priveleges and facilities.

And don't even get me started on a school dinner costing less than a prison one.

Quote: Cinnamon @ October 13, 2007, 8:27 PM

Hmmm...I know little of this situation, but I'd hope that they would be well treated or I somehow feel that it would drag us to their level. Besides, it would hardly help to rehabilitate them. I tend to agree when it comes to restriction, however, as if we're locking them away then we agree that they shouldn't influence society and society shouldn't influence them.

View original

Firm but fair would be my view. Certainly not mistreated. But if I don't work, I can't eat or support my family and it should not be easier for a prisoner than it is for a non-prisoner, surely?

Rehabilitation would come through hard work and study, not TV and Nintendos...