Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Still Waters No Longer Running, Derp.

Options
1505153555681

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    Jernal wrote: »
    He sells papers. Is the belief. A double blind trial would really be needed to verify this. I would expect that the newspaper bosses may be surprised at the results. In any case, media seems to be going the way of getting more and more trolls to comment. Extreme lefties and righties get the most air time and the moderate groups get squeezed into obscurity.

    That is true. I think that under the banner of 'free speech', anything can end up being tolerated. The problem with free speech is that it should be there but with conditions. Hateful, racist or other hurtful speech needs to be got rid of.

    Extremists from the right and left do indeed get the most airtime. Controversial figures are seen as colourful and exciting. Moderates are not given as much.

    But many extremists are not so much extremists but are the voice for extremists as they are opportunists who can then make a fine living out of writing and saying controversial things. Waters is achieving his goal of creating interest and attention towards himself and his paper. That is why we are talking about him here and why also we may go and buy or read what he said!

    Most of these people are either: A darling for Catholic Ireland/an outspoken opponent of religious interference? A defender of the right/left wing point of view? Or just a shallow opportunist?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    That is true. I think that under the banner of 'free speech', anything can end up being tolerated. The problem with free speech is that it should be there but with conditions. Hateful, racist or other hurtful speech needs to be got rid of.

    No it doesn't, that's the whole God-damned point. Who gets to decide what is hateful or hurtful speech? It's ridiculously vague and arbitrary.

    Here is the test to see if you are a supporter of free speech: Think of an opinion that you hate, that you think is horrible and the world would be a better place if it stopped. I'm going to choose homophobic speech, where someone can publish an article demonising gay people and advocating that they be denied rights purely because they are gay. Here's the test: Do you defend that person's right to say what they want to say, even though you hate it? If the answer is yes, then congratulations, you are a free speech advocate! If the answer is no, then booooo, you are in favour of speech with which you agree and nothing more.

    That's the whole point. If you ever advocating stopping someone from saying something because you disapprove of the content of their speech then you are not in favour of free speech.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    http://www.krank.ie/category/opinions/dear-john-addressing-john-waters/

    A guy named Paddy takes issue with Waters comments on depression:
    Paddy wrote:
    Dear John,

    This is a tough letter for me to write. Less than 24 hours ago, I had taken to Twitter to launch a truncated, under 140 character tirade against you and your opinions. I hated you. Genuinely. From the moment that I heard your opinions on depression, I felt a terrible resentment grow within me and that quickly escalated into pure hatred. As unsettling as that might be for you to hear, I assure you that it was equally (if not more) terrifying for me.

    You see, I don’t offend easy. In fact, I thrive in dark humour and shocking statements that provoke a reaction out of people. The likes of Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr make a living from making crude and often tasteless remarks and I applaud them for it. I am of the firm belief that nothing should be taboo and that everyone is entitled to their own opinion on matters without fear of demonisation – within reason.

    My problem with you was not the fact that you said ridiculous things – god knows I would not be in any position to slate anyone for saying stupid and mis-timed statements – but my problem goes deeper than that. You see, as unpopular as it is to admit this, I don’t think that everything you say is wrong. In fact, I share some of your beliefs. You just happen to put your points across in such a way that makes it harder for people to respect my views.

    As a single father, I vehemently support the campaign to see equal rights afforded to fathers when it comes to their children. I don’t, however, feel the need to oppose the rights for gay men and women to adopt in order to push my personal agenda forward. They are not mutually exclusive options. It’s not as if you need to pick one or the other. And by your attempt to disguise your opposition of gay adoption behind the facade of purely fighting for the rights of the single father, you belittle our plight and end up putting more barriers in the way for people like me. The issue is the welfare of the child, not the sex lives of the parent(s).

    Personally, I do not think that it was right that you became somewhat of a scapegoat for that infamous Saturday Night Show incident. I wouldn’t even necessarily call you a homophobe (I also don’t think I will see you wrapped in a rainbow flag at a gay rights parade any time soon but I certainly wouldn’t put you in the same category as the Iona Institute). You have your opinions on homosexuality, either on religious or personal grounds, and you are entitled to hold these views as much as people are entitled to oppose you, but I think mentioning you in the same breath as the Iona Institute was slightly over the top. But as a journalist, you should know that while you need to be true to your beliefs, you are in a privileged position where your opinions will be read by the general public so when you are asked about incendiary topics like gay marriage, you still need to remain respectful. You haven’t been and this is why you were mentioned.

    But as much as the above irritated me, your wholly insensitive approach to depression infuriated me. You see, I too am skeptical about how depression is portrayed in the media. It seems to be the illness-de-jour lately and you cannot open a newspaper to see a celebrity or sports personality opening their hearts about their “battle with depression”. Depression has become diluted to such an extent to where it is often confused for just “having a bad day”. You could compare it to people saying that they have a flu when they have a head cold – but that doesn’t mean that influenza doesn’t exist.

    Depression is a very real and very serious problem in Ireland and by you having the audacity to say, “I don’t believe in depression. It’s bull****. It’s a cop-out”, you completely piss all over the struggle that countless people encounter on a daily basis. If only one person sees your quote and dismisses depression as a “cop-out” and refuses to seek help, then their blood is on your hands. That might seem like hyperbole but that is, sadly, the reality of the fact. It is perhaps the singlemost irresponsible statement for a man in your position to make. As I have said, everyone is entitled to their opinion but the addendum of “within reason” is extremely important.

    You are entitled to your opinion but only when it is based in some sort of fact or even a debatable point. To say that you do not believe in depression is as ridiculous as me saying that I don’t believe in gravity. As someone who has personally suffered from depression and been lucky enough to come out the other end, as someone who has seen family members almost succumb to depression and as someone who has lost people that I held dear to depression, I can safely say that you are wrong and I am not going to sit idly by while you make light of my struggle and the loss of my friends. How very well dare you?

    Before Pantigate and before your college interview, I didn’t like you. You came across as smug and full of your own self-importance and your attempts to be controversial and cutting edge were pathetic. Even after the Saturday Night Show controversy, you remained little more than an annoyance. You again, are in the spotlight. Your work here is done. People are talking about you (myself included) and you have managed to squeeze your name into a few more column inches.

    I said at the start of this letter that I hated you John. I don’t. Not any more. To hate you would take too much effort on my part and you frankly are not worth it. It would be glib and condescending of me to say I pity you, because I don’t. Pity would infer that I somehow cared about you. But with your statements about depression you have become dangerous and I implore you to please just respectfully fuck off.

    Paddy


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,067 ✭✭✭✭wp_rathead


    It true Daily Mail have given Waters a column? If so they perfect fit for each other

    Or have been victim to an hilarious photoshopped job

    Check out @Blackhall99's Tweet: https://twitter.com/Blackhall99/status/456342461133361152


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,849 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I guess the Indo offices are already toxic enough with Quinn there.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    I guess the Indo offices are already toxic enough with Quinn there.

    Don't forget Maj. Ask my Arse.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,378 ✭✭✭BuilderPlumber


    Zillah wrote: »
    No it doesn't, that's the whole God-damned point. Who gets to decide what is hateful or hurtful speech? It's ridiculously vague and arbitrary.

    Here is the test to see if you are a supporter of free speech: Think of an opinion that you hate, that you think is horrible and the world would be a better place if it stopped. I'm going to choose homophobic speech, where someone can publish an article demonising gay people and advocating that they be denied rights purely because they are gay. Here's the test: Do you defend that person's right to say what they want to say, even though you hate it? If the answer is yes, then congratulations, you are a free speech advocate! If the answer is no, then booooo, you are in favour of speech with which you agree and nothing more.

    That's the whole point. If you ever advocating stopping someone from saying something because you disapprove of the content of their speech then you are not in favour of free speech.

    I am an advocate of Free Speech with conditions. Clearly, there are some things that need to be curbed. I think most reasonable people would not tolerate such 'free speech' as:

    -Al Qaeda or similar mass murdering terrorists justifying their belief that killing 1000s of people is the right thing to do.
    -Anyone who picks on a group (be it race, creed or sexual orientation) and justifies serious harm to them (killing, imprisoning, driving them out).

    Dangerous terrorists would thrive on uncontrolled free speech. So, free speech with conditions is the only way really. But the conditions should only be serious: for example, 'all [insert group] should be killed' or [the [insert terrorist group name] were right to kill as many as possible' should not be allowed under any circumstances whereas 'it is not right for [insert group] to take advantage of [insert situation] and may cause problems' is acceptable.

    But, comment on issues like who has the right to marry, what is family, what political decisions are right or wrong, debate on legality of drugs, etc. all are fair game and there should never be someone blocking someone's views when they don't agree with it.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,307 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    John should have done Today FM's shave or dye. Shave his head, or dye it rainbow. Better use of 40k than going into his pocket.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    John should have done Today FM's shave or dye. Shave his head, or dye it rainbow.
    Not the only thing Dear John could have shaved.

    303644.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    robindch wrote: »
    Not the only thing Dear John could have shaved.

    STOP. POSTING. THAT. ****ING. PICTURE. :mad:

    Seriously, I need to go wash my eyes out in bleach right now, then drink until I reboot :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Links234 wrote: »
    STOP. POSTING. THAT. ****ING. PICTURE. :mad:

    Seriously, I need to go wash my eyes out in bleach right now, then drink until I reboot :pac:

    You know...if I wasn't a quair before seeing that image I sure would be afterwards...

    *insert vomiting emoticon*


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Links234 wrote: »
    STOP. POSTING. THAT. ****ING. PICTURE.
    Hmmm... I whipped out my favourite photo editor and slapped a huge red X over Dear John. Unfortunately, Satan must have been guiding my hands, for the bottom-right to top-left bar of the X hid all of his left hand, save for his thumb and frankly, his thumb stopped looking like a thumb at that point and started looking like something else.

    Need a stiff drink myself now

    smiley-sick032.gif


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    robindch wrote: »
    and frankly, his thumb stopped looking like a thumb at that point and started looking like something else.

    Need a stiff drink myself now

    Ah here. :mad: As if the picture wasn't bad enough without me having to imagine that....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    robindch wrote: »
    Need a stiff drink myself now

    Stiff? STIFF!? Please stop, you're making it worse! :eek:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Links234 wrote: »
    Stiff? STIFF!? Please stop, you're making it worse! :eek:

    Finally somebody has aroused your interest. It must be hard for you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,849 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Links234 wrote: »
    STOP. POSTING. THAT. ****ING. PICTURE. :mad:

    Seriously, I need to go wash my eyes out in bleach right now, then drink until I reboot :pac:

    The last time an image disturbed me as much as John Waters in the nip, I was watching a 60m-tall red cyborg getting torn to shreds.


  • Registered Users Posts: 34,111 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    This thread is hirsute-man-ist :mad: The mullet is objectionable though! (even though the front half of it is missing in action.)

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    XKCD that is deeply, deeply relevant to Jawn & Co.

    free_speech.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Links234 wrote: »
    XKCD that is deeply, deeply relevant to Jawn & Co.
    Do we have a freedom of speech right included in the Constitution ? Do we have a 1st Amendment ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    The last time an image disturbed me as much as John Waters in the nip, I was watching a 60m-tall red cyborg getting torn to shreds.

    Also... Evangelion? :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    You know...if I wasn't a quair before seeing that image I sure would be afterwards...

    *insert vomiting emoticon*

    Talk about emotional rollercoaster- imagine how happy John would be to have it proven people could turn gay, and then how upset he'd be that he was the reason people turned gay :D


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,516 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    robindch wrote: »
    Hmmm... I whipped out my favourite photo editor and slapped a huge red X over Dear John. Unfortunately, Satan must have been guiding my hands, for the bottom-right to top-left bar of the X hid all of his left hand, save for his thumb and frankly, his thumb stopped looking like a thumb at that point and started looking like something else.

    Need a stiff drink myself now

    smiley-sick032.gif

    I must do a Mormon porn version of that image...
    I'm currently at the inlaws for the next few days so might get funny looks uploading it on their ancient old PC, damn lack of wifi!


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    5uspect wrote: »
    I must do a Mormon porn version of that image...
    I'm currently at the inlaws for the next few days so might get funny looks uploading it on their ancient old PC, damn lack of wifi!

    Jeez make sure you wipe the browser history :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Cossax


    Piliger wrote: »
    Do we have a freedom of speech right included in the Constitution ? Do we have a 1st Amendment ?

    We do, A40.6.1. It's a qualified right however.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Cossax wrote: »
    We do, A40.6.1. It's a qualified right however.

    A pretty weak and milk'n watery version:

    "The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.
    The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law."

    Lots of tools to arbitrarily quash free speech there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    "Controversial columnist John Waters has accused The Irish Times of treating him like "Osama bin Laden"."

    Truly these appear to be Irony-free Waters......

    "He also said: "This fundamentally is about a toxic culture at the heart of The Irish Times, which no longer actually subscribes its views to the principles [of the newspaper]. I will read them out to you."
    Reading aloud from the memorandum of articles of The Irish Times Trust, Waters then went on to list the ways in which he feels the newspaper had failed to live up to its promise. These include the newspaper's pledge towards the discouragement of discrimination of all kinds; the promotion of a friendly society and the promotion of peace and tolerance and opposition to all forms of violence and hatred.
    "Huh? It's satirical. This is satire. This is f**king satire," he said."
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/im-not-osama-bin-laden-waters-30201367.html
    Sing it how it is there John.

    "I applied to be editor of The Irish Times to make these points even though I wasn't going to get the job, but in 2011 I decided that the moment was so serious – so grave in my view – that I went along to make a number of points to the panel.
    "I didn't want the job. Let me be absolutely clear I did not go for the job either expecting to get the job or wanting to get the job. I went to make a case for something that has been absent in The Irish Times for a long time," he said."
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/im-not-osama-bin-laden-waters-30201367.html
    I believe you John. Others...well they're a cynical objectivist lot with no moral compass...but me, I believe you.

    "Waters also told how he felt frozen out by his former colleagues at the newspaper. "I don't really have relationships with anyone in The Irish Times anymore. Because over the years, their attitudes to me – because of my writing about men – have become so hostile and they have made many attempts to have me fired."
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/im-not-osama-bin-laden-waters-30201367.html
    That's it John. The ranting, the bad writing, the gay bashing, the creeping Jesus act, the woman bashing, the ego, the WRITS AGAINST FELLOW JOURNALISTS had nothing to do with it. It's them, not you.

    "He added: "I would like some gesture to be made to acknowledge the incongruity between what The Irish Times is supposed to stand for and what this shows that it is actually like."
    When asked if this meant a financial gesture, he replied: "I haven't asked anyone for financial gestures in my life. I don't even know what a financial gesture is. Raising a fiver in the air. Is that a financial gesture? If The Irish Times want to give me money, I won't refuse any money they will give me. But it's been pretty miserly with its money in the past so I don't think it's going to change this in the future. I would like some decency."
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/im-not-osama-bin-laden-waters-30201367.html
    That's it John. You wouldn't go hunting after cash for anyone. You're better than that. You're John Waters.


    And the piece de resistance.......

    "Waters, who sparked controversy over his remarks on depression in last week's Sunday Independent, said he has saved many men from the brink of suicide who have been left in despair at the hands of the family courts.
    "What has affected me more than that is the absolute attempt to bully me into silence on the issue. I have no right to speak [for] my own humanity. Or the humanity of thousands of men who come to me in despair. Many men I have pulled back from the brink of a cliff, suicide, because I was able to get to them in time. This society is indifferent to it. The legal profession has stitched it up."
    But when a study from last year, which found young gay people in this country are seven times more likely to commit suicide, was quoted to him earlier in the interview he replied: "I have seen no evidence to support that or substantiate that. I have dealt with suicide – male suicide for 20 odd years – I have written about it. I have never come across that as a significant phenomenon."
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/im-not-osama-bin-laden-waters-30201367.html
    Stay classy John, stay classy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Sweet suffering Jesus


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    efb wrote: »
    Sweet suffering Jesus

    That's who John thinks he is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 551 ✭✭✭BurnsCarpenter


    I feel sorry for the guy tbh. The Indo are milking everything they can out of his little meltdown but the Times are somehow the bad guys?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 658 ✭✭✭jjpep


    I feel sorry for the guy tbh. The Indo are milking everything they can out of his little meltdown but the Times are somehow the bad guys?

    I agree. At this point they're clearly taking advantage of someone who in the least is a bit delusional and at worst is having a mental breakdown.


Advertisement