But Where Are You Really From?

[Rusty Nails]

Yes I can imagine that too...

I didn't imply she wasn't mortified after the fact, she's certainly said she was, I'm happy to accept her at her word. .

But I have also read that even palace insiders found her a tad 'imperious' in her manner, so that could suggest she might have been resistant if any suggestion of 'retraining'.had been made.

I could probably recount many many different imaginary scenarios, but that could get a tad dull after a while.

In contrast to Frank's appraisal I'd say that imagination is actually a very valuable thing.

One of its many benefits is being able to imagine how other people, who are not you, could feel in certain circumstances.

This can help in the development of empathy 👍🏼

I never had you down as someone who listens to Palace tittle tattle spoken in hindsight.

 

[mudsticks]

I never had you down as someone who listens to Palace tittle tattle spoken in hindsight.

Yes that's right 'tittle tattle' 🙄

Or reporting from someone who has had an experience of interacting with Lady Hussey in the past - which can only be in hindsight - that's how time works.

From the undisputed-by-anyone, interaction with ms Fulani it's quite clear that Lady Hussey wasn't exactly 'down to earth' in her approach.

Maybe she will learn something useful from it.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Yes that's right 'tittle tattle' 🙄

Or reporting from someone who has had an experience of interacting with Lady Hussey in the past - which can only be in hindsight - that's how time works.

From the undisputed-by-anyone, interaction with ms Fulani it's quite clear that Lady Hussey wasn't exactly 'down to earth' in her approach.

Maybe she will learn something useful from it.

You are going round the same well-trodden circle now about the comments of Lady H to Ms F.

Anything else, including (unverified?) comments from a selected palace 'insider(s)', that no one knows were common or accurate, is just used to buttress already held views. What "earth" is an elderly aristocrat expected to be "down to"? She has staff for that sort of thing, and being haughty, while nothing to be proud of, is not at the top of my list of the bad things people can be.

 

[Ian H]

As an aside, I notice that Mrs Hussey is a couple of years younger than Jane Fonda.

 

[mudsticks]

You are going round the same well-trodden circle now about the comments of Lady H to Ms F.

Anything else, including (unverified?) comments from a selected palace 'insider(s)', that no one knows were common or accurate, is just used to buttress already held views. What "earth" is an elderly aristocrat expected to be "down to"? She has staff for that sort of thing, and being haughty, while nothing to be proud of, is not at the top of my list of the bad things people can be.

It was her one job to 'welcome' at the event in question


If she wasn't able / was too 'haughty' (your words) to be properly welcoming to anyone and everyone that she might meet, at that event, then she shouldn't have been put in that position.

As it happens I've known quite a few elderly 'posh' people, many of them are perfectly able to understand how priveleged they are in social situations, to act with grace and not talk down to others.

I said earlier that imo it was as much the palaces fault, as hers.

Anyway, Lady Hussey resigned, and then apologised, so clearly she herself realised she was out of order.

Even if that was a little after the fact.

 

[mudsticks]

As an aside, I notice that Mrs Hussey is a couple of years younger than Jane Fonda.

"Fun fact" 😎

 

[Rusty Nails]

It was her one job to 'welcome' at the event in question


If she wasn't able / was too 'haughty' (your words) to be properly welcoming to anyone and everyone that she might meet, at that event, then she shouldn't have been put in that position.

As it happens I've known quite a few elderly 'posh' people, many of them are perfectly able to understand how priveleged they are in social situations, to act with grace and not talk down to others.

I said earlier that imo it was as much the palaces fault, as hers.

Anyway, Lady Hussey resigned, and then apologised, so clearly she herself realised she was out of order.

Even if that was a little after the fact.

At last we can agree.

 

[mudsticks]

At last we can agree.

Well that's something I guess, although I'm not sure what you were arguing against anyway tbh.

Bedtime here anyhow, early start the morn.

 

[AuroraSaab]

When the death penalty was abolished, women finally had the vote, slavery was abolished and so on this change was brought about to a greater or lesser degree by a relatively few people who for one reason or another believed enough in these issues to fight for them .

Some of them were then accepted with a resigned shrug by the general population, but certainly not necessarily by majority consensus.

No majority consensus for women to have the vote? I suggest almost 50% of the population were probably in favour ...
Half a million women and men demonstrated, at a single event, in favour of it in 1908. Quite a good turn out for something without public consensus.

Slavery? Well there were individuals like Wilberforce who campaigned vociferously, but I'm not sure the general UK population were either against his efforts or simply resigned to enduring the ending of it. In fact I'd say that because the vast majority of British owned slaves were in the West Indies the ordinary UK population probably had little idea of the atrocities being committed, or its scale. The more people knew, the more the consensus grew to abolish it.

Similarly, the death penalty. Public opinion on the issue moved because of a general growing uneasiness with capital punishment and a few specific cases, such as Derek Bentley and Ruth Ellis. There were no mass demonstrations to keep hanging. For all people say they favour capital punishment, it's often just frustration with what they perceive as lenient sentencing. Most of them would pick life without parole for murderers over execution in a straight choice.

If a government tries to impose a law without public consensus because it imagines it is taking a moral lead, there needs to be very careful analysis to make sure they are not simply listening to a vociferous minority.

 

[newfhouse]

Yes. I enjoy discussions about language and meaning (it's kinda my thing - I could do it all day)

I think Shep is closer to “Done with dictionaries” 30p Lee.


View: https://twitter.com/leeandersonmp_/status/1603782046173765637?s=61&t=epvImi9Ij3iu8VU5S6oTtA

 

[AuroraSaab]

Not a fan of that channel, but as a general principle 'being done' with factually incorrect dictionaries doesn't seem unreasonable.

 

[Unkraut]

I get a slightly different story from my female, feminist, transrights supporting colleague who is German.

But yes the language there is morphing to accommodate new ways of thinking

There is an attempt to artificially change the language to reflect modern insanity.

But anyway, assuming it isn't some nonsense Unkraut picked up from spending too much time reading weirdos on the internet, sounds like just an outcome, hardly new, of the entry of women (or more women) into more areas of life, in combination with a language which is heavily gender-marked. As always, the language debate is about something else - in this case Unkers having the usual panic about women doing stuff that men do, or women and men doing stuff that he imagines is eroding the fabric of society. This is old-fashioned patriarchal backlash stuff and hardly the cutting edge of feminist language debate.

This belongs in the fiction section of the library. These fake feminine plurals adorn all sorts of publications like teletext which I skim read when looking up the weather. It just looks silly. It is silly. The only reason for it I have heard is that for too long women have 'felt' excluded. Feelings are irrelevant!

If people want to write like that they have that freedom, but I hope this will not become something imposed. There is also a trend to insert asterisks or semicolons to show your support for transgenderísm. I'm asserting my right not to do this as I don't support transgenderism!

Following on the German theme , ...

"In our Constitution our number one priority is maintaining human dignity, and so hate speech is not part of the German concept of 'free speech' "

It's Article 1 of the constitution. Article 5 forbids the imposition of censorship. @AuroraSaab has already commented on this, but so-called hate speech must not be allowed to become a backdoor form of censorship. Who gets to say what exactly constitutes hate speech, and is it being allowed to shut down dissenting opinions. There was a flurry of comment in this neck of the woods not long ago when a survey revealed something like two thirds of the population are increasingly scared to say what they really think about current issues.

The sort of nonsense I am complaining about here can trivialise serious problems.

 

[Ian H]

What about the Frenchies and their randomly gendered nouns?

La bicyclette est un vélo, simplement.

 

[theclaud]

Not a fan of that channel, but as a general principle 'being done' with factually incorrect dictionaries doesn't seem unreasonable.

Dictionaries describe usage. They don't arbitrate in disputes. The primary definition hasn't been removed. Lee is an idiot and the entire channel is garbage.

 

[theclaud]

like teletext which I skim read when looking up the weather.

OK now I know you are making this up.