To tell you all that David Walliams has been dropped by his publisher Harper Collins?

No. There were claims specific material was removed from Walliams' autobiography. It's impossible to mention the claims without identifying someone.

Sorry but the bad 'uns have a look about them. I never liked the look of him from his very early days. They have a certain look that says 'Dodgy character' to me.

‘Of course, they call all be made up’

I assumed you were referring to the young women who were entertained by DW in his dressing room after the BGT live shows were filmed.

Were you not?

I was referring to one specific claim about material cut out of Walliams' autobiography. I haven't said anything about any other claims.

Ah yes all these women are liars
Nothing worse than a male centered female
Dangerous

I haven't read the full thread. Has anyone commented on the now deleted Twitter stuff where it looked very much like he was having inappropriate relationships with young girls? Inviting them into his BGT dressing room, etc. That all seemed to get brushed under the carpet, but unless the screen shots of conversations were faked, looked very damning.

This is admittedly now third hand information, but a close friend knew of some very disturbing allegations regarding David Walliams which went back YEARS. My friend was told it directly from someone in Walliams' "inner circle", as my friend had subsequently started working very closely with the source.

I was not surprised when the allegations of inappropriate behaviour with young girls subsequently surfaced. Also not surprised now allegations from HC are being heard.

Of course, they could all be made up.

If the allegations relate to claims related to an earlier draft of his autobiography - I'm pretty sure that's made up.

Separate the art from the artist.
if kids enjoy his books, so what?

I haven't read the full thread. Has anyone commented on the now deleted Twitter stuff where it looked very much like he was having inappropriate relationships with young girls? Inviting them into his BGT dressing room, etc. That all seemed to get brushed under the carpet, but unless the screen shots of conversations were faked, looked very damning.

This is admittedly now third hand information, but a close friend knew of some very disturbing allegations regarding David Walliams which went back YEARS. My friend was told it directly from someone in Walliams' "inner circle", as my friend had subsequently started working very closely with the source.

I was not surprised when the allegations of inappropriate behaviour with young girls subsequently surfaced. Also not surprised now allegations from HC are being heard.

Of course, they could all be made up.

I judge people for listening to r Kelly and Michael Jackson sorry

The Jackson 5 at Christmas time I can tolerate but just Michael's albums, no. So weird of people to go to see his film at the cinema?!

Anyone that works in publishing... would someone's back catalogue be dropped like this if there WASN'T a scandal brewing about them? I know Walliams' sales are down, but surely they still sell a lot...

Yes but this character was hideously offensive iirc, not life-like and just a bad Black caricature. Very different from a Black brit doing their parents accent.

It's also written by two men who've previously enjoyed doing blackface and other bigoted things

Vile all round.

I suppose it would have still been a problem if the two white men had written the character; but I've seen a number of black comedians- including Gina and Jocelyn - doing material centred around their heritage.

It's a recurring theme amongst British comedians of African, Caribbean or Asian heritage to imitate their parents' or grandparents' accents for comic and stereotypical effect in sketches or stand-up. Off the top of my head, as well as Gina and Jocelyn, Nathan Caton, Stephen K Amos, Romesh Ranganathan have all done it.

The precious character was hideously offensive and would've still been so with a Black woman playing her.

He didn’t write his books. Ghostwriters did. Which is why they are happy to drop him. The same ghostwriters can just write similar books under the name of a different more palatable celebrity.

You can't separate art from the artist really. Because often the proceeds from their art is used to do harmful things. Millions of HP fans will continue to enjoy JK Rowling's books, franchises, theme parks and merch. JK admitted that she has donated and backed a change in the law by taking a case to the supreme Court that defines only a woman is a real woman if born with that biological sex. Sounds harmless doesnt it? Many trans women agree that their biological birth sex and chromosomes which can't be changed (even if other biological characteristics can be changed) are indeed male at birth whilst they are living as a woman now. But that definition hard baked into law means many trans women can be refused a place in a women's space. Yet neither are trans women safe in men''s spaces like gym changing rooms where they can be stared at, ogled, attacked or ridiculed. Trans women are women. Some trans women these days never developed as an adult male through puberty, they have been girls for a long time and forcing them into men' a spaces is shocking and not safe.

JK has abhorrent and discriminatory views on trans people, non binary people and now asexual people (What's wrong with not having a sex drive or sexual relationships? That's not a choice either) and those who separate her from her art are ignoring the fact that the millions in her revenue are being ploughed back in to support legislation that can be prejudicial to minority groups that she decides should not have the same freedoms as others.

What has the author David Walliams done with the proceeds of those buying his books I wonder. And can we stop him using his book revenue to do sleazy things we wouldn't approve of? Probably not. So why fund it? And how will our own kids feel when they grow up and find out that we were happy to give them books they enjoy without any discerning nature towards authors?

As a child I had a stuffed Golly. I didn't even know what it depicted until I grew up and found my Nan watching the Black & White minstrel show on telly. If my Mum had realised it was such a racist doll she wouldn't have let my Nan buy one for me. But parents considered it harmless and was "just a nice toy and the baby doesn't know it's racist, why not let the babe enjoy a Golly!) Patons Yarns Bazaar booklet even had a knitting pattern for a Golly featured on their cover. You can't separate that type of doll from it's complex and racist history. You can't separate the art from the artists.