Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Rustybear posted:

his crisis managament ppl have played a blinder; it's mad that his brother is currently in prison for the EXACT same crime and yet he's going to skate on it completely

has anyone else seen a really big push of 'aww leave him alone' on twitter from soft left/centrist types (eg. steve bray) who otherwise have never mentioned him before or since. i assume theyre all just getting paid upfront by his pr people

I don't think this is a correct read of the situation at all. His brother was convicted of sexual abuse of someone underage. If the timeline constructed by others is correct, the guy Schofield was having the affair with was between 19-20. Certainly questionable and immoral (both the age difference and the power balance are issues warranting attention), but certainly not pedophilic in nature.

I'm personally more sympathetic to him on principle because I've seen this happen countless times with older closeted gays and lesbians. I can probably count on one hand those who came out at 40+ and don't end up having some form of relationship with a twenty-something year old. They're always embarrassed a year after and settle with someone their own age. They seem to want to pretend that they are that age and reclaim time they spent in the closet. Overall, it is a bit odd, but there is nothing inherently evil about it.

I'm especially concerned with the language and debate surrounding him, as a member of the LGBT community. The right has ramped up their attacks within the last year or so. Currently, trans people are having their identities erased under the argument that their mere existence around children is a threat to the child. While this isn't new, they have become emboldened by their successes across multiple nations and are now setting their sights on the wider community.

This issue, unfortunately, is wider than Schofield and there are legitimate reasons to defend him (to a certain degree), at the moment.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Private Speech posted:

Yeah the "we didn't start shagging until he was 19, honest" comes from schofield himself. IIRC there were rumours he was seen being far too close to him already when he was 15.

Then again if the first lady of France can get away with it, well.

Part of my reason that it doesn't pass my own personal smell test of homophobia is because the people I see online saying these things are often associated with far-right groups and are talking completely out of their arses. I'm not saying that this is not the case, but I feel like if there was any amount of legitimacy to those claims we would see something more substantial - someone in the drama class, parents of the person involved. If this is the case, they are definitely being drowned out by the far-right in this scenario.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

The Question IRL posted:

So there is a lot to this whole case. There is a lot of information and confusion about what time this happened at and where. Did Schofield make contact when this person was underage or was he talking to him when he was over the age of consent, but still decades younger than him?

To look at the situation in the fairest manner, look at the facts that are not in dispute.

1) By Schofields own admission he lied to a lot of people about what had happened. He is trying to justified why he lied about it, but he has admitted to lying about it. That fact alone means whatever he is saying about the situation now is suspect because he has little to any credibility left. It also means that his version of events ("this was just unwise but not illegal") has to get scrutinised.

2) If you look even at select quotes or clips from that interview, Schofield has the victim mentality of a narcissist. "Do you have any idea how hard this is on me, not being on a TV show?" Or "yes I was talking to an underage person online. Are you saying we should never talk to an underage person online or it might be considered to be grooming?"
This is a other warning sign.

3) Even looking at the rough outline of events, it sounds dodgy. He helps this person get a job on the show, they start a relationship, it ends and now the person is working on another show? And it was all hidden from management and other people? Hidden from his own management agency and his bosses at the TV station.
But according to Schofield, we are supposed to believe that this is fine. Or that if it was a hetero couple involved, then nothing would happen?

I disagree. I think that there is more of a willingness now to at least pretend to take onboard the dynamics of abuse of power levels in relationships now.

I fully accept that the degree that tabloids have latched onto it, is for cynical and explotive reasons. But the "legitimate" media trying to downplay it seems very much like they don't like where the conclusions would lead on this.

All of this is a legitimately fair argument and I do not disagree with your conclusion at all. My main issue is that I haven't seen enough to justify the claim of grooming specifically and exclusively because the timeline of how involved he was in the guy's life while he was underage. Reports say that he was 15 when they first met as a part of a drama class, but how involved were they? Did they just meet the once and then work together? With television the way it is I would not be surprised if he was pulling strings, but we cannot assume that. Tabloids are oddly quiet about that period. It is possible (even probable) that it is due to some sort of gag order, but at this point the Daily Mail is posting photographs from 2017 of the guy with Schofield on nights out. It is odd to me that they are able to publish those but not any real information on how involved they were with each other prior to the sexual relationship.

I'm absolutely willing to be proven wrong at this. The way the industry is generally handled it feels party wrong to attempt to defend him. There are so many bad actors that I don't blame anyone for assuming he is guilty.

Even if my view is correct, Schofield is not a particularly good individual. The apparent open secret about his affair must have been difficult for his family. I assume at least some of the people working on the show are also innocent and now, potentially, their jobs are at risk. Again, based on what is confirmed, what he did was 100% immoral and selfish, but not at the level of the crimes of his brother.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

OwlFancier posted:

I do not feel it necessary or helpful to defend media creeps out of some wider LGBT solidarity, nor to be honest do I want to be particular associated with them by way of that idea.

To be blunt, I'm inclined to defend Schofield because I've worked with LGBT groups and I've had more than one instance of someone older harm themselves in some way after coming out because they still have deeply ingrained homophobia. My posts come from seeing elements of these people within the wider story and, as a result, I'm more inclined to at least attempt to take him at his word, at least as long as there is nobody claiming to be a victim currently.

As noted in my first post, it is very common for someone above the age of 40 to come out and date someone in their 20s. These relationships are definitely strange and never last, but they are to be expected in a case of arrested development.

Assuming I am correct, those people who are of Schofield's age and are deeply closeted are going to be afraid to come out lest they are tarred with the same brush. They will be far less likely to come out. I've spoken to too many older LGBT people who are at the point of mental breakdown because they can't get past their ingrained homophobia - that now they have come out they will abuse children, or that they can't see their children anymore because their former spouse has that view.

Coming out later in life is incredibly difficult, and while commentary from the likes of the Mail is mainstream, it prevents these people from comfortably leading their lives. I'm more on their side than Schofield's.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Rustybear posted:

little purpose in argueing around the point. we've only got his verson of events; if the lad or any of the alleged others come forward with a different version of events then that will change if they don't then it is what it is.

Yeah I'm at this point now. It's not a clean cut situation and if I were to continue talking about it I don't think I'd word my arguments properly. Too much skin in the game and I feel like I'd start taking things more personally than I should.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

OwlFancier posted:

Haven't there been sexwrong allegations floating around about some prominent labour figure for a while?

Just a few days ago a Labour MP basically said as much without naming names.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/labo...ssault-12895013

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Hilarious move. She's only standing down because she was removed from the peerages list and wants to damage Sunak on her way out.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Bojo-a-gogo

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Tesseraction posted:

Well one benefit of this is that Sunak currently controls who can stand in which seat, and Johnson is almost guaranteed to lose his seat in Uxbridge and Ruislip, so he had planned to migrate to a safe seat for the 2024 election (or thereafter).

As long as part of the gently caress-boris faction are in charge he's basically locked out of being a Tory MP.

Or that gives Dorres a 90 day clock to launch a hostile takeover of the Conservative party before she resigns to allow a glorious 10,000 reign by Boris.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

We missed out on the funniest timeline.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

smellmycheese posted:

I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest Kieth will backpedal , or just break, this promise to the electorate.

https://twitter.com/kevinaschofield/status/1670691518158454785?s=46&t=m_nNbkNoHG4lLitcpyHReg

He'll have a pre-resignation honours list. Promises made, promises kept!

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Guavanaut posted:

People pay more attention to New New Labour when they abandon policies than when they create them, so they've found a cheap way of staying in the social media news.

It's the "no such thing as bad publicity" mindset for politics.

The problem with Starmerism is eventually you run out of policies to abandon.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Red Oktober posted:

How about this:



(For context it’s the “ok then, keep your secrets” meme but with the text cut off - idea is it’s recognisable to someone who knows the meme but not others)

There’s a lot in Google scholar about memes.

Another similar example:



Where the original has the subtitle "... the Irish Reunification of 2024." People have been posting it for the last few years since Brexit, especially with the increase in support for nationalist parties. I've started seeing it without the subtitle or with a close zoom on Data's face in the last few months.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

I don't want to meet anyone who would describe themselves as "enthusiastic" for Starmer.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009


Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Yeah, it was on Cartoon Network.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

DC have been publishing a sorta continuation of the series lately and it's been mostly pretty fun. They've split the volumes into "seasons" so it's not too difficult to follow either. Only odd thing is they've incorporated a bunch of more modern concepts and characters which feels a bit at odds sometimes.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

forkboy84 posted:

Does it have the same incredibly cool noir look? Because I think I might get obsessed with the aesthetic style of Batman: The Animated Series now that I've actually seen more than stills for the first time. Coz what the gently caress possessed someone to make a cartoon in the early '90s that feels like it was set in the 1930s? I dunno, but it's cool they did & that it seemed to pay off.

No, he was in GTA4

The first two volumes have a pretty similar aesthetic. I felt as if it could be pushed a little more but I was content with it.



Unfortunately they seem to have made a shift in art direction for Season 3 (currently ongoing). Not as big of a fan of this and I'd probably drop the comic if I wasn't personally interested in it.

The comic also has the advantage of having Paul Dini involved in it. I don't think he does much except guide the broad strokes but it makes it feel a little more like an actual continuation.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Tesseraction posted:

Batman in the animated series is played by the beloved (and sadly now deceased) Kevin Conroy, who popularised the idea of Batman and Bruce Wayne using different tones of voice. He and Mark Hamill reprised their roles as Batman and the Joker for the Arkham video game series.

On another comic related note, Conroy had his own comic in DCs Pride anthology in 2022 about his struggles as a gay voice actor in the 90s. I'm not sure if it was published after his passing but I did read it after and it did make me emotional as a gay person who grew up loving the series. You can find it online and it is well worth a read.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

If you ask me, clowns (MPs) belong in the circus (Westminster)!!!

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Miftan posted:

That is pretty strange, but looking into it you can move away for up to 7 years easily. Past 7 years you just have to fill in a form annually otherwise the justice minister can, in theory, revoke your citizenship. I don't know how often that actually happens.

https://www.irishimmigration.ie/how-to-become-a-citizen/intention-to-retain-irish-citizenship/

On this note it is actually a bit difficult and might be impossible if you don't have the documentation to back it up. When I came back from Canada after a few years I had to prove I was an Irish citizen through physical documentation and communication which was a little difficult since most of those years were me being a teenager. Had to dig up payslips and call around schools to prove that I had existed (despite the state absolutely having all this information on hand).

In my experience, it's pretty daunting having to dig up this stuff knowing the penalty is (potentially) being stateless. I can't imagine the difficulties non-white Irish have with the whole process.

gently caress that couple though.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

I think the intention behind the schemes isn't to fully get rid of private cars but to discourage their use and encourage use of public options. In this instance, the woman with four kids (going to different schools?) would need it, assuming a complete good-faith argument that she needs separate schooling for all four kids.

I can personally only justify three schools. One kid in primary, one in secondary, and one in some sort of specialist school. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that at there's at least a few families in that position, at least for a time. In this instance it is harder to argue that she should use public transportation (assuming the children are young enough that they can't take it alone). This doesn't negate the fact that very few would be in this position and that the default shouldn't be these services.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

I agree with Question IRL on this. While the American yellow school bus is a good system and should be implemented here/elsewhere it isn't entirely universal and mostly depends on the American suburb system. Out in more rural areas these aren't as funded and they won't/can't pick you up no matter where your home is. In my own experience living briefly in rural America, this was the case and my relatives had to either drop their child off at school themselves or bring them to a bus stop halfway between home and the school.

Similar issues will absolutely be faced in the UK, especially in more rural areas. It won't matter if the State has infinite money, there will always be 5% of students who live in an awkward area just a little too far away from school to make a consistently workable system.

Again, focusing on my own experience in rural Ireland, everyone in my village had to get picked up at a certain location. It was walkable for me, but this wasn't the case for some of my classmates. Additional buses would be ideal, but I don't think sending a bus to pick up three or four kids is much better than having two cars take each family, for example. While one could argue that they could bike to these locations this wouldn't account for additional storage for the bikes, the ages of the children (some might still be considered too young to/have issues which prevent them from travelling alone), or even something as simple as poor weather in the winter.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Guavanaut posted:

Reducing school run traffic by 95% is good enough for me, perfect is the enemy of good.

(Starmer is also the enemy of good, but for different reasons.)

Socializing kids to use buses from as early on as possible would be the best way of achieving that, and you could do it by granting free bus travel to anyone travelling with a child under x years old. You'd also probably get some stupid conspiracy shite about gangs of swarthy Swedes passing around the same 3 year old to get free travel but you get that with everything.

e: ^^ :hfive:

I absolutely 100% agree with this. I was more arguing against the point that private cars have no place in school runs. I was just attempting to highlight some issues in more rural areas because I find that a lot of leftist debate around these issues ignores/is ignorant of just how remote and awkward some places can be :)

The vast majority of kids, even in rural areas, can and should use public transit, even at a younger age. There's next to no danger to them, especially if each bus limits itself to one school per bus.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

DreddyMatt posted:

I don't hate anyone son
I just don't think the traditional traveller lifestyle is particularly compatible with life in modern Britain.
Never called anyone thieves or scum.
Not wishing death on people, unlike other posters in this thread.

You're advocating for a way of life to be completely eradicated because you are self-absorbed enough to believe that it is inherently invalid because you have had a couple of bad run ins. Cop yourself on.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009


About right. We are somehow flush with surpluses and "rainy day funds" but little is being invested back into the nation, especially with regards to social housing. Slight error in the article which says rents in Dublin are €1,800, which is technically correct but applies to the county of Dublin, not the city. Recent estimates have the average rent in the city at €2,500 per month.

https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/average-rents-now-over-2500-26915683.amp

Many have been priced out of my area which is half the reason I moved out of the country as a whole. Average rent in my old county in February was €1,550 per month. Combine high cost with absolutely atrocious living spaces and a lack of protections for renters (even compared to the UK) and there isn't much point of being there, regardless of how "great" the economy is apparently doing.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Here's a weird question that I can't seem to find an answer to no matter who I talk to - why is Manchester's Pride always scheduled for August? Feels a little odd for it to be in June for the rest of the world but two months later in some areas.

I assumed it was related to an LGBT rights related event specific to the city at some point but I can't find any evidence of this. The reason most places celebrate it in June is because of the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots at the end of the month.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

crispix posted:

belfast's is always in august too but the reason for that is pretty obvious

Trin Tragula posted:

It's a bank holiday weekend and it gets well out of the shadow of That There London. Same reason Birmingham went the other way and have theirs round the Spring bank holiday.

Thank you both!

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

NotJustANumber99 posted:

There was talk a couple of years ago about refurbishment/repair that the houses of parliament needed and how it would be best if the mps moved out temporarily during it.

Perhaps they should move onto the Bibby Stockholm to demonstrate how great a place it is after all this bad publicity.

They don't even want to take the minute walk to the Elizabeth Conference Centre. Many MPs seem content to stay even as the water gets to their ankles and the rats are eating though the walls.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Failed Imagineer posted:

Conclusion: "yer balls, has to be a wind-up"

I trust Gibbo on this.

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

MeinPanzer posted:

Canadian living in the UK here. The French Canadian situation is totally different. Most don’t actually identify with France as a country much at all; they view themselves as a distinct group in pretty much every way and haven’t harboured any actual interest in belonging to a French state for centuries. In my experience, they also often feel neutral to negative about French people because they’re very much aware of being viewed as bumpkin curiosities by them.

Seconding this - grew up on the border of Ireland and lived in Canada for two years. Every person from Quebec I met or talked to never cared about a connection with France. I ended up questioning this a bit because Quebec independence makes less sense geographically without some strong international connection.

Funnily enough, there is currently an active minor political party on the provincial level that advocates that Quebec should be annexed by the USA and become the 51st state. There is no such political party which advocates the same from France.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parti_51

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

"We will pump poo poo on the beaches" - Winston Churchill

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

Jaeluni Asjil posted:



Source https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/iceland-richard-walker-baby-formula-illegal-b2397834.html

He says in the interview - apparently if you buy baby formula you're not allowed free parking even if you're going to buy other stuff!

(I thought our local Waitrose did but having thought about it, you pay for the parking and then you get the money back on your till receipt).

Ok, so maybe breast is best, but many women can't breastfeed for a variety of reasons or can't do it all the time.

They already shrank the contents of a can of C&G first milk powder down from 900g to 800g & the price up from £8.50 to £10 (M&S) £10.50 (Boots) £11 (Waitrose)

I think Ireland has similar laws. I remember when working in retail that you couldn't use vouchers for baby formula. I worked by a council estate and had a few heartbreaking conversations with people struggling to get by assuming they had a bit more leeway with their budget.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Skull Servant
Oct 25, 2009

It doesn't appear to have any significant reason apart from Wallace resigning. There's probably going to be another more significant one in the next month or two so they can rotate out all the people that are standing down next election.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply