To be deeply disappointed in John Cleese

[drspouse]

I have no idea if this is typical but he just tweeted that London isn't an English city any more
What is it then pray tell? What's not English about it??

When we lived in a Spanish speaking country we spoke English at home, DC spoke Spanish at school and DH and I did our best with Spanish out and about. We were only there a couple of years but DC were fluent when we left and DH and I were getting there.
We did all the things that out host country expected us to do and thoroughly enjoyed out time there.
We are all massive advocates for this country and its people now. If we had been berated for speaking out own language at times or had our early Spanish mocked we maybe wouldn't be so positive now.

And it continues:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.indy100.com/article/john-cleese-tweet-race-dna-david-lammy-adam-rutherford-8943136%

Sorry, that one doesn’t work:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.indy100.com/article/john-cleese-tweet-race-dna-david-lammy-adam-rutherford-8943136%3famp

Pointless2

nice link (fan of Adam Rutherford from "The Curious Cases of Rutherford and Fry"). However we might have got to 1,000 posts without any real grounding in facts, so please think about that in future before you barge in and contaminate the discussion.

(That's a btw)

For what it's worth I'm with Adam (and Dawkins) about race. It doesn't exist. And trying to weasel things like "ethnicity" into public life is simply an attempt to try and call someone black, brown, yellow, or white based on whatever the flavour of the day is without resorting to words of colour.

I thought we had reached peak poppycock with the story about Will Smith "not being black enough" to play the Williams sister father in a film. Which brings worrying about someones skin tone down to a new low. However, tomorrow is always full of wonders.

so please think about that in future before you barge in and contaminate the discussion

you’ve lost me

A belated (and clearly misjudged) attempt at "humour". Clearly I'm not English enough.

I was posting the John Cleese aftermath - as the tweets have continued and also been responded to.

Anyway, I’m off now. This thread has been quite depressing, apart from some voices of reason.

I thought we had reached peak poppycock with the story about Will Smith "not being black enough" to play the Williams sister father in a film. Which brings worrying about someones skin tone down to a new low

The reason behind that is that there is a thing about fairer skin being considered more aesthetically pleasing and acceptable, particularly in film. Only recently has there been a change.

For ages every black family you would see in a film , even if Will or Denzel or another too notch actor was in it, their on screen wives would be fair skinned and the children as well.

There have been situations where a biographical film of very dark skinned Actor/actress was being commissioned and lots of uber talented dark skinned actors/ (actresses particularly) would be overlooked in favour of a lesser talented fairer skinned actor/actress who bears little to no resemblance to the person they are depicting . It even happens with Mexican and Latin American actresses/actors. The fair skinned mexicans are more characteristically promoted.

Happens across modeling, advertising, everything. People aren't buying skin lightening products in the billions worth all over Asia, Africa, South America and the West for nothing. They're doing so because they feel it is more desirable and advantageous to be closer to white or just fairer.

Obama and Meghan Markle. It is actually questionable as to whether they would have reached the positions of society they are in now on their talents, gifts, personality popularity alone had they been dark skinned. I like to think so. I don't know. Calling them black instead of mixed raced/dual hertitage means that question won't get answered.

You can compare photos of dark skinned rappers and singers from the past to now and some have suspiciously become several shades lighter.

It's not just poppycock.

Has anyone mentioned the People's Front of Judea yet

Essentially the John Cleese argument is " Its not how I remember it and it should be".

You weren’t around, I presume, so I’d vouch he knows better than you whether it was a better culture in which to live years ago. “In some ways I found it calmer, more polite, more humorous, less tabloid, and less money-oriented than the one that is replacing it.” Sounds nicer to me.

Isabella - I would hazard a guess that many on here were not around, as you say. Though I am not as old as Cleese, I do remember the 60s/70s/80s and it was definitely a more sedate and polite society.

Catherine I absolutely agree with your post. In fact, where I used to live, near Shepherd's Bush, there are many shops serving Afro-Caribbean needs, and a big part of the sales is lightening lotions. Shade is a big deal in Asia, Arabia, Singapore and Africa. It helps in the marriage stakes of course.

I remember the actor Yaphet Kotto saying (in character in Homicide-Life on the Street) that he hadn't been able to find a woman to marry because he is considered too dark.

I would have more patience with the argument that Mr Cleese only misses the old sedate ways if he hadn't done quite so much as a younger man to try and help disrupt them.

I remember the actor Yaphet Kotto saying (in character in "Homicide-Life on the Street")

Now that is niche !

Shade definitely matters in some societies, it is a huge class marker in Mexico.

I do remember the 60s/70s/80s and it was definitely a more sedate and polite society.

Depends who you were.
I remember my non-white classmates getting terrible abuse. Just casually, we're not talking "ooh you aren't English" we're talking P word and N word. Skinheads. I know things are supposedly getting worse but you could be MUCH more obviously racist and get away with it.

I remember being told outright I couldn't do a lot of things because I was a girl. Not lack of role models - outright refusal. My DD is 5 and she was very sad to hear that I wasn't allowed to play football. That's just the start of a long list.

BrittW I have been reading your 'percentages' post on p.31 - very interesting and actually accurate. I have seen something very similar before. The UK has more than passed the 5% mark and is closer to 10% imo, because there are quite a few undocumented people.

I remember my non-white classmates getting terrible abuse. Just casually, we're not talking "ooh you aren't English" we're talking P word and N word.

And that was the teachers

I would have more patience with the argument that Mr Cleese only misses the old sedate ways if he hadn't done quite so much as a younger man to try and help disrupt them

Rebellion and dissension used to be the hallmark of the young. Now they’re all incredibly eager to appear woke, parrot the same phrases and to conform, and make damn sure everyone else conforms too. Very weird, and very boring.

Maybe that’s another form of rebellion

Rebellion and dissension used to be the hallmark of the young

I think that's the problem. The baby boomer generation rebelled and did radical things, and they did it better; free love, polyamorous communes, drugs, black power, androgeny, socialism, communism, anti-apartheid, anti-nuclear, radical feminism, live aid, everything.

Then they ironically settled down, brought property, became conformist, had 2.4 kids, a dog, a volkswagon a range rover, and a house or bungalow and a job for life and now live in large part conservatively even if they are liberal to a degree.

Meanwhile subsequent generations picked up on those ideas but without the same degree of critical appraisal. It's all 'don't conform' whilst also doing don't question, underpinned by a hyper-individual mindset.

All well and good, but when you criticise and reject all the tenents and instituions that serve to bind as a national identity, then yes there's a loss of national cohesion.

Someone upthread decried religion. All great civilizations have needed religion with ensuing rites, and passages and observances. It binds people and thus nations together. You cannot dismantle it without ensuing chaos or giving power wholesale to the state.

People now, replace religion with causes and become dogmatic about them, showing intolerance for other peoples point of view ramming their causes down others throats.

Religion can also be a check on political power and on the individual. It's a balance one that's been done well in the west until now.

The problem is immigrants are not letting go of their traditions or their religions and appear to have a stronger cultural identity. But it's not their fault that countries like the UK have turned away from theirs.

I was around, it was also a racist, sexist society where people were discriminated against legally. It was a time when sexual harassment was seen as a bit if fun and women and girls who complained were dismissed. It was a time of strikes and as much public discord as there is now.

Hahaha the baby boomers rebelled? In the comfort of knowing that they would have a job or access to education when they wanted to return to it.

Oh and, when the young do revel or protest or do something different, people like you chastise them for it.

Or in other words the rose tinted spectacles or a very privileged white man do not equate to accurate recall.

“Though I am not as old as Cleese, I do remember the 60s/70s/80s and it was definitely a more sedate and polite society.”
Sedate and polite- apart from the sexism, racism, disablism. Apart from the horrendous and accepted class divide. Apart from the domestic violence that nobody questioned. I could go on, but you get the picture. And yes, I was there.