Victoria Beckham used to be so different

[Thatannoyingadvertsongstuckinmyhead]

I like her and think Brooklyn’s recent posts are awful.

I was looking on YouTube today and a video came up of her over the years, mainly with the spice girls and when younger. She was so funny, so cheeky and seemed so strong & confident. She did full, proper smiles and laughs, so nice to see.
Totally different to now, is it just age and we were all probably more like that in our youth?

So you're okay with equivalent terms that people with epilepsy find offensive, potentially suggesting that they're uncontrolled louts, as long as the term doesn't potentially imply they're Irish?

OK, then ...

I’m a bit confused by the challenge of the poster in question- neither they nor anyone else has used language someone with epilepsy would be offended by so way are you challenging them on it?

I was pointing out that common expressions often have historical cultural implications, which may offend. Saying someone threw a fit is just as offensive as saying they had a paddy.

I did write that objections are valid. Also that I feel a bit sad about the decreasing permitted colour in our language.

The PP ignored everything I said except that part about 'paddy'.

It looks like you were challenging them for not caring about insults to other groups including epileptics. Which is a strange challenge when I assume they do care, but it’s not relevant to this example

Fees they are paid by charities for appearances in the US are not taxed.

Contrary to popular belief most celebs don't do charity work for free. They get paid.

Equally if they set up a charity or foundation they do not pay tax and they can make 'donations' of money to their charity...

That's why the Sussex's etc do it.

Equally in the UK if you have a charity you only need to put I think 8% of of all monies taken towards the actual cause and the rest can be soaked up in 'admin'.
Again that's why celebs start foundations.

This is shocking. What greedy f’s some celebs are

Well I'm half Irish and I wouldn't bat an eyelid if someone described a temper tantrum as a ' paddy'. Completely different context.

Same here and same with "taking the Mick".

@MyUnderpants my late g/grandfather Paddy - he was actually called Paddy- thinks we should all just go to the pub, he liked a drink,so he did! 😁

Same. My parents were Irish. Couldn’t give a hoot.

I still don’t think this is quite right or relevant to the beckhams

so celebrities in the USA don’t pay income tax on income received as payment for a hired role at a charity event? Are you sure?

if you set up a charity or foundation you don’t pay corporation tax on “profits” no. What good is that to a celebrity who sets up a foundation? They can’t take the profits as income -as surely US charity law prevents this (it does in the uk) -plus, it would be taxable income (not for an event etc)??

none of this happens in the uk anyway, but I am not convinced I believe it in the US. The pastor/ cult comparison isn’t relevant, that’s totally different.

Could be….but he’s most likely talking about his sexually incontinent dad and his damaged in denial desperate mother - and the fake wholesome family fantasy that they shill for ££££.

Sense of humour required!

Why do you keep saying sexually incontinent?! What does that even mean? Those words don’t go together

Probably just me, but my sense of humour tends to run out when it comes to racism.

I don't think taking the mick has any Irish link, it's just a coincidence re mick/Catholic.
Paddy doesn't bother me either. Have only ever seen it as an issue on MN. Words evolve (another MN gem).

so celebrities in the USA don’t pay income tax on income received as payment for a hired role at a charity event? Are you sure?

That's not what I said. If they are a charity they don't pay tax, if they are ordained they don't pay tax and there are other legal structures that don't pay tax. This family will have one just like the Sussex's and will be swerving paying tax.
Celebs do charity work for pay. They get paid to do it, whatever is said about them donating their time it's a job.
They are there to raise awareness so they are paid for their time. If they themselves run a charity they will take a donation from the charity they are appearing for to their charity.

So while everyone is holding a street carnival for the wonderful DB and his charity work, he is doing it because he gets paid tax free for it and gets Knighted for good measure.

I mentioned my client who is a minister because I knew from him how it works. And he lives in America so it's relevant.

But a night in the cells for me thank you Thread Police 🙄

Everyone I honestly had no idea it was racist in any way. Not that ignorance is an excuse but I apologise to anyone who was offended. I won't use that term ever again.
I'm sorry. 💐

It means he'll shag anything and anyone.

The point is- the Beckhams don’t do this.
they are not a charity
the are not ordained
they are based in the uk

No they are not based in the UK. They live in the US and how do you know they aren't a charity?
They take part in many tax avoidance schemes.

Hey, nobody is offended......nobody sensible thinks ' paddy' is racist. There are more serious issues in this mad,bad world xxx

The Beckhams? Do you know anything about them?!

UNICEF, 2025:
Sir David Beckham has spent over 20 years advocating for children’s rights all around the world, following his appointment as a Goodwill Ambassador in 2005.
He launched 7: The David Beckham UNICEF Fund in 2015 – with the goal of helping children around the world, especially girls, break down barriers including bullying, violence, child marriage and missed education.

He’s travelled extensively to see UNICEF’s work and used his profile to raise awareness and launch global fundraising appeals, including supporting Soccer Aid for UNICEF.

We continue to be so grateful for all of his support in amplifying the voices of children globally.

UNICEF, 2019:
Since 2005, David has travelled extensively to see UNICEF’s work and championed our global campaigns. He has raised awareness and vital funds for urgent – and often hidden – issues affecting children, including malnutrition, emergencies, violence against children and AIDS.

https://www.unicef.org.uk/celebrity-supporters/david-beckham/

UNICEF, 2017:
Our ambassadors support Unicef in a voluntary capacity, receiving no fee for their time and commitment. They contribute greatly to Unicef’s work for children.

Since the 7 Fund launched it has raised millions of pounds for Unicef programmes and reached millions of people around the world with crucial messages about its work for very vulnerable children.

THE VICTORIA AND DAVID BECKHAM CHILDREN'S CHARITY:
Launched in 2002, the charity historically supported disabled children by purchasing equipment, such as state-of-the-art wheelchairs.

Over £900,000 was distributed to charitable causes, including Aid Mobility and other health-related organizations.

It was replaced by the UNICEF Fund 7, see above. It is financially inactive.

.....

I'm not a particular Beckham fan, but continue to be startled by the absolute vitriol directed at them over all this week's threads. They're just people trying to do what works. Like everybody else, they get some things wrong and exceed expectations in other things.

All rich people take part in tax avoidance schemes. It isn't a crime or a moral failing, it's financial management. My personal view is that there are too many of these schemes and they're too forgiving, but that's a political position. Rich people are not wrong to use them as they exist.

The Beckhams are not US citizens and they live in the UK.

How did we get to discussing this?