OMG Miriam Margolyes Andi Peters

I get the feeling she’s had a lot of encouragement and acceptance especially around some left stuff re Gaza etc and of course loads of money. It’s a strong incentive.

But with this she looked like she didn’t get the waters she was swimming in, AP dealt with it well.

It depends on the context. And I don't mean the race of the person speaking.

There are dll kinds of situations where it's fine to talk about, where you could discuss even old terms no longer in use.

It wouldn't even necessarily have to be a really serious deep discussion.

But this had no context at all, it was weird and off-putting.

I do think talk shows like this can be difficult . People I suspect prepare things to talk about, because it's not a normal conversation and they need some comments or tidbits prepared.

And they are celebrities do they are pushing a movie or book or persona. They want to say something that will appeal to the public, make them seem smart or quirky or intellectual, whatever.

She wanted to look with it, a touch controversial, as bit surprising, here. But she seems not to I realise it's very transparent and she we comes off as nasty and attention seeking.

The Guardian has become a very low quality paper I'm afraid. It's been a slide so I think people sometimes suffer a boiled frog effect.

I'd put it on par with the Daily Mail now or even a bit lower. Occasional good articles and research on certain topics, a few good writers, but overall a tendency to fan service and you have to be careful about trusting their spin.

But they tend to a kind of paternalistic condescending moralism that is much more enraging than the DM.

I am sure i heard it in a film maybe D'jango unchained.

Just so we’re clear it doesn’t surprise me in the least that you’re not interested in self-reflection when @LuckyHazelFox calls you out on your abject hypocrisy.

There is complimenting someone in context is fine i think, but she absolutely just pulled it out of nowhere!

Recently saw a MN poster blathering that, "Freedom of speech DOES mean freedom from consequences. And if there are consequences then it isn't freedom of speech."

If Miriam Margolyes is no longer booked by TV stations because she is so very likely to be rude and even racist to the hosts or guests, is that her freedom of speech being curtailed?

Do TV stations somehow have a duty to book her?

I wish I could remember the poster's name, and they could come here and answer this for us.

Fantastic!

Yes but presumably it was in the context of a discussion about ethnicity and skin colour? Not some random discussion about the price of fish and then she rocks in with comments about the skin colour of her guests?

I really hope this link works. It absolutely sums up MM totally and hits the whole scenario on the head perfectly!

x.com/intel_lady/status/2095894741120319689/video/1?s=46

I say this to people all the time, many of them are white, most of them are white actually?

I said it yesterday to someone.

I remember Oprah Winfrey taking about different types of black skin and nobody batted an eyelid.

I completely agree @WiltonGal

Framing everyday diversity as this dazzling 'otherworldliness' might be part of her unfiltered TV persona, but in reality, it just dehumanises people into background props for her own spectacle.

The only place I've ever heard the term "high yella" is a book about slavery. Said by a slave owner.

Just so we’re clear I’m not interested in what you think is “fine” for me to say.

What are you hoping to achieve from this? Would you like to say MM is the only racist of her generation?

From your post: One's a practical medical example, which you know is acceptable. From your second example, you've offered a sociological perspective on a generational approach to culture. Fine if you're using empirical evidence. Not fine when you're (subjectively) applying broadbrush strokes.

Depends on the context. It’s legitimate to say that vascular eczema generally affects more elderly people than younger. Or that younger generations brought up in multicultural societies tend to have greater cultural awareness than those who have not. Doesn’t mean that there aren’t individuals who buck either trend.

Broadbrush doesn't work when it votes to race. Why should it when discussing age?

"oh haven't you got such beautiful colouring".

Genuine comment from a woman who would vehemently oppose anything remotely right wing. I mean it's well intentioned but FFS

Yes i thought this she thinks "they" are beautiful and fascinating and exotic like a bird of paradise or something!

This is my parents’ generation. I simply outlined a broadbrush sketch of cultural attitudes to race among that generation based on personal experience.

If you think trying to pick a fight to distract from the topic at hand will work, it won’t.

MM treats people who are not white as an exotic fascination, like she has truly never come across someone other than white in her life. She either goes around London and the world with a blindfold who gets dazzled by “other” people when it’s removed, or she is trying to be controversial for publicity to push her book.

You're not OK with racism but perfectly OK with ageism. If you're going to take the piss out of liberals and do parody, I would say you're doing a grand job 👍 very accurate portrayal.

Or perhaps they have more direct experience of racial issues.

However, I feel the same about certain posters - whose ignorance and hypocrisy around race is somewhat ironic on a thread like this.

Well racism is always is always elsewhere isn’t it? Not among my naice liberal circle who all have the correct opinions, I’ll have you know.

ime of that generation have some have some dodgy attitudes to race, some are not racist at all, and some are not racist but use anachronistic language so it’s difficult to tell their actual perspective unless you know then very well.