BORN TO BE DIFFERENT is back on.

[TheOriginalFAB]

This Thursday at 9pm on channel four.

You make interesting points about how being on the show may protect them.

But you also scold me for things I have already apologised for, or explained my position on. Sorry there are still plenty of people yet to apologise for the pages of hate sent my way, so... not going to feel like the one in the wrong here.

how sincere is an apology from someone who persists in thinking that they are not in the wrong? i wouldn't take that seriously from a five-year-old.

not at all sincere...

I apologised for any unintentional offence caused. That is genuine. But it was obvious what I meant in my comment, and it was not poorly worded and I do not feel the need to apologize for what I wrote.

I believe 100% that is the right thing to do - another analogy - suppose I was misheard, and some people thought I said the N word, and showered be with hate - but they were wrong, I never did. Should I apologise? Should they?

I have said this show might not be as exploitative as some of its kind, that's a matter of opinion, but its one that a reviewer for The Times was unsure of for one. Still I have expressed regret that I may have been unfair on this show anyway. And yet you are still asking for another apology?

No. Go get some people who were 100% sure I was attacking disabled kids to apologise.

catmilk - I find you intriguing. In the face of much upset caused by your post which I accept was not intentional, you go on to justify it in the most grandiose manner possible. And then insult all the people who were upset by the post saying they are not sophisticated enough to get you.

I think you need to get over yourself. I, personally, have not seen this program but I completely disagree that all these channel 4 shows are freak shows. I saw the one about "my beautiful face" and found it to be brave, moving, courageous and be thankful for what I have got. There is an underlying lesson in some of these shows. In that program it was not to be so caught up with vanity - there are far more important things in life.

Your protestations of these shows are clearly not cerebral - just reflex. Otherwise you would not be putting BTBD in the same category, as according to the viewers, it os dealt with in an appropriate and sensitive manner.

I think you enjoy being the rebel or the maverick but sometimes protesting too much can be as conventional as following the crowd.

I have absolutely nothing against you but I think a large amount of self reflection would be in order.

Catmilk.
I didn't see your original post and have nothing to scold you for.

Yet you seem to be enjoying a role as 'uncompromising facer of the truth' rather than using what you clearly see as a huge intellect to engage with people. Perhaps you could step away from the ego and just explain a bit - you know, for the rest of us who would rather talk about it than be sneered at.

I am I interested in your concern about exploitation of minors. But minors are used in all sorts of tv like talent shows and parenting shows. And did you really need to use freaks?

meh. a straight-up 'okay i totally fucked up and got on my high horse about the wrong show' would be an apology, not this mealy-mouthed nonsense.

i don't think you were ever calling disabled children freaks, and never did, but i can see how (because you were talking about a programme that is in no sense a 'freak show') you may have been misinterpreted.

i reckon that a proper 'oops, wrong thread, i made an arse of myself' apology (which i personally am not asking for and do not give a fuck if you deliver) would have seen people back down in a heartbeat. because you did make an arse of yourself, pronouncing on the wrong show, you daft eejit.

who was the guy at the times, btw. what did he say about BTBD? there is a firewall, of course.

Pagwatch I didn't call anyone freaks in my posts. I have repeated what I first posted, now that I have established its context, both here somewhere (not word for word) and on the thread made about that post. Please search it out and come back and tell me if you 'got' the point I was making.

I'm not so much 'enjoying any role as uncompromising facer of the truth' as sick of being hauled over the coals yet again while those that wrongly accused and abused me sit back, and well, snigger probably.

No, I don't like kids on tv talent shows. I think they will probably be screwed up later by the experience. Some small usage for a few minutes is not really problematic IMO.

its context was that the OP had merely posted that it was on and you came on speaking in very shrill terms about freakshows. you set the context with your post, there had been nothing prior to give a tone at all. how can you be cross at people responding to that?

if you had turned up twenty minutes into a thread about the programme itself (as the OP no doubt intended it to be) i have no doubt that you would not have posted at all, or would at least have moderated your tone. this is where you made an arse of it.

like i say, on a thread about 'the world's fattest man' or 'the girl with six arms' or whatever, your comments might have been relevant. it's just that in this instance you were talking about the wrong programme. you said earlier that it was 'obvious' what you meant. do you really think that so many people would have jumped to the wrong conclusion out of what, spite? it's a nonsense. you fucked up. be a woman and accept that.

Why 'got' rather than got?

I am going to bed in a minute. I am not doing a miss marple trying to find threads about threads.

As best I can work out many of the poster on here have children with sn. I very much doubt that they are sniggering. I suspect that your post felt like another shit straw on a knackered camels back.
But you seem to wish to feel aggrieved and hard done by. Maybe you are less articulate than you imagine.

But I am off to bed. You had your chance to convince me otherwise. I am [meh]

Aitch, I think I HAVE made that apology, if not word for word.

The Times review is on the Wiki entry - except its not from the Times, its from 'the London Paper' which was Wikis way of referring to The Times which it had just quoted. My mistake.

"In its review, The London Paper expressed concerns about the voyeuristic approach of the show and asks: "what is to be gained from watching harried mothers breaking down, and children being constantly reminded of their problems by the camera crew? [...] Let?s just hope Channel 4's intentions were in the right place."

So for you and everyone else assuring me this show is completely different to those OTHER shows... I am yet to be convinced, and will not say 'Oh sorry, I was a complete ARSE mixing up this wonderful show with that trash....'

Oh dear....some people don't grow. I can feel a name change coming on.....

have you ever watched the show? it's on four od, i should think.

and that 'but think of the kids' review is a tropey line that reviewers say when they have run out of ideas, believe moi.

and catmilk, you haven't made that apology, you are still insisting that you are RIGHT, fgs.

I am sometimes a bit of a wanker. I say the wrong thing and am too much of a twat to just step back and be honest about that.

You wont find your comment on the thread i started as MNHQ had the good sense to remove it again (albeit a long time after i asked them too) If you post it again, i will report it again!!! Simple as that!!!!

Seems like the reviewer has a few issues.

I mean why remind these children of their 'problems'?

Without this programme turning up every few years they they wouldnt have a clue they were different would they?

Do they feel the same about the programme made about children born at the millenium? I mean why turn up every few years and remind the children in that they are erm children?

Its the tragedy model all over again. Shhhhh lets not speak about the 'problems'

Mrs DV.........hijack...........have written on your FB wall!!!..................

Inverted snobbery "I saw the one about "my beautiful face" and found it to be brave, moving, courageous and be thankful for what I have got."

Often the same feeling people got from Victorian Houses of Medical Marvels... You don't see any show where someone is paraded around so you can feel thankful for what you've got. You prove my point that these shows can be distasteful (unless you like them of course...)

While the lovely Fanjo wrote "Catmilk..my child is worth 1000000 of ignorant people like you"

Sweet, and no one asking for her to apologize.

Aitch, I have apologized - you think I'm lying? I've done it several times wtf are you on about?

Catmilk why don't you just watch the show (previous episodes on 4OD)? Then you could actually have your own informed opinion about the potential exploitation of these children rather than relying on journalists ' opinions on it? You have swathes of moms on here, some with children with SN, who think it is actually a sensitive portrayal of their lives.

i said 'you haven't made that apology', catmilk. i would have thought a reader of your sophistication would have noticed that. you are being a bit too weird, though, so i am offski. i think you should read Pagwatch's last post again to see if you can work out what she is trying to tell you...

Pagwatch's last post told me she couldn't be bothered to put much effort into finding out the facts. Familiar story.

lol. none so blind.

Oh cat milk
Stop trying to be clever than you are.

You are like the pissed bloke trying to tell everyone he is just tired.

I shouldn't have to search threads for you to use your mahoosive skills and explain your point. Stop wriggling.

You sneered at a programme based on 'tv bites' and tried to throw freak show into the mix to look all cosmopolitan and knowing.
Actually the programe is well done and your wording was I'll judged.
Let it go or move on.

But your oleaginous performance in self justification is starting to make me feel queasy.

Seriously. Move on. No one thinks the worse of your distaste for exploitation. Just your target and manner were wrong and offended people