to complain about Peter Kay's 'Autism' joke ?

[densekay]

BBC One show last night, Peter Kay enters studio flanked by a couple of Children in Need 'Pudseys'. Peter Kay falls prone on floor & flails arms etc. Jokes he is 'autistic'. Laughter.

Not on iplayer, been cut. Very offensive so not surprised.

Is he that dense that he can't see it as unreasonable to get a cheap laugh from those with a condition that benefit in many ways from financial aid supplied by Children in Need?

Google throws up he often jokes at expense of those who are Autistic.
But on a show with Pudsey?

I think it not unreasonable to not only complain to the BBC but also wish a child with autism on him & his wife, maybe he would be less insulting.

OK - so OP should have read:

BBC One show last night.
Peter Kay enters studio flanked by a couple of Children in Need 'Pudseys'.
Shortly after being introduced and some chat about his tour, Peter Kay falls prone on sofa, goes rigid with arms outstretched arms and shouts "ohh" etc.
Makes a joke that implies he is behaving in the manner of an autistic person.
Laughter.

(I note her point about the Children in Need connection has been almost completely ignored by the pedants!)

BBC One show last night.
Peter Kay enters studio flanked by a couple of Children in Need 'Pudseys'.
Shortly after being introduced and some chat about his tour, the dull and insipid presenters pretend to stretch him in preparation for his tv appearance. Whilst prone and struggling, he calls for the crew to cut to a vt about autism.

That's still completely misreprensenting the episode FC.

It's strange nobody else who watched it saw what the OP saw and then posters get on the bandwagon and start complaining to the beeb, about something they have not seen.

Nothing happened at the entrance - he did his jokey 'Amarillo' dance on the way in with 2 Pudseys next to him, then he went and sat on the sofa.

Obv everyones perception will be different,but I was not offended by what he said, although I appreciate that some people have been.

Most concerning to me is clearly how much attention I was paying to The One Show last night

yes he said 'show that VT about autism' obviously cause they got him in that weird position.

I am more offended by the part of the OP that says " but also wish a child with autism on him & his wife, maybe he would be less insulting."

That is several shades of wrong.

detoxdiva - I am glad you were paying attention. i didn't watch it. So if nothing happened in the entrance, and nothing has been edited out, what Peter Kay actually did was no where near as bad as what the OP described.

"Shortly after being introduced and some chat about his tour, Peter Kay falls prone on sofa, goes rigid with arms outstretched arms and shouts "ohh" etc"

that is totally misleading though - the chat about his tour were talking about him doing stretches and vocal exercises beofre the show. He was due at (the 02?) his show in an hour or something so they suggested they did them there. That's when he lay down and they "stretched" him

Baggy - absolutely.

The op is written in a way to stir peoples emotion about a subject that we would all agree would be in bad taste and offensive to joke about.

Perception is the issue here - if some have been offended then no-one else can come along and say they are wrong for that, however, it was wrong of the op to incorrectly state the events and comments Kay made last night.

No, it's never just semantics, Show of Hands, which was why, as I was referring to a very small selection of the posts from the total discussion so far, I added "now" afterwards.
Your account of the incident is hardly balanced if you're including your personal opinion of the presenters' behaviour in an account meant to dispel mine of Peter Kay.
(and LOL at "Without being Peter Kay you cannot know which is the truth"! )

So put it in your own words, bruffin. I have seen it - whether it was broadcast live is irrelevant. Are you trying to argue that a viewer can't complain about things just because they didn't see it live rather on the "watch again" service provided by the broadcaster itself?

Good lord

I can't see the clip and I can't therefore comment but please OP have a good think about wishing a child with autism 'on' him and his wife

You make a child with autism sound like a curse, like syphillis or acne. My son has autism and i wouldn't wish him 'on' anyone - they would be fucking lucky.
There are people on here who have autsim- not just those who care for people with autism. Not very tactful..

Which actually goes to the Pater Kay thing - from the varied posts it sounds like it is down to intent and interpretation really

Yes the description of the presenters was ironic. But not being inside my head, you can't know that. Other posters may have picked up on the fact that I was being witty. I don't watch it. I don't know who the woman is at all.

yes when I read the OP's first post with her description of it I was fully behind complaining. And went off to see if I could find an un-edited version of it to view - and for others to see before complaining.

Now it would appear the actual event was not "as reported" and the comment at the end open to interpretation I'm not so sure.

Okay, include that the chat was about stretched and vocal exercises in the OP. Include a whole transcript of the chat to that point if you like (I've transcribed it and will be forwarding it as part of my complaint). It's still offensive.

Very telling that Chris Evans and Alex Jones made a very obvious effort not to laugh alaong with the crew. They knew what Peter Kay meant and that it was inappropriate.

NO I am saying that there were a group on this thread complaining about something they hadn't seen at all, purely on the OP's word, which turns out to be wildly inaccurate.

oP...Are you going to defend your 'wish it on them' comment?

I would just like to add that in the situation I am in, it's quite obvious I wouldn't approve with the OP wishing an autistic child on someone. I'm basing my posts on the actual programme, not the OP.
Having said that, it's a brilliant demonstration of something being offensive regardless of intent. Can't have it both ways.

I was very disappointed I missed out on buying tickets for his sellout tour in Dublin next May.

Having a daughter with Asperger's (and believing I have it myself, and it's SO horrible living with it believe me), I feel sick that he would joke about it. Sadly he's not the first, and he certainly won't be the last.

So I'm pleased now that I got tickets for the much lovlier Take That instead!

I interpreted it that he wanted them to show the VT so that he could carry on being stretched and the VT happened to be about autism.

never mind the all that, lets talk about the legions of dissaffected Peter Kay collegues

He is said to be VERY disliked in the industry

lady watch the link before you get cross- you might change your mind

I did- before that my Pen Of Fury was poised

ooh let's Foosa

You see what is happening now is that people are going to read only the op (as they are entitled to do), make up their mind and store only a few basic facts about what they read. This will colour their perception, they might report these 'facts' and so 'Peter Kay makes horrid jokes about autism' becomes true. The iplayer thing will go and the damage is done.

And I think offence vs intent is a very interesting and unclear issue. Of course something can be offensive regardless of intent but can something being offensive mean you can deduce intent? I suspect not.

I like Tim Minchin.

Oh Show - I luuuuurve Tim Minchin