Lunchtime Live with Ciara Kelly [Mod warning post #1]

gunnery sairsint

gunnery sairsint wrote: »

Did anyone notice the stressing topic today?

At Newstalk breakfast, they were talking about stress.

On Pat Kenny, he was talking about stress.

On Ciara Kelly, she was talking about stress.

On Moncrieff, he was talking about stress.

Then, driving home from work, I put on Ivan Yates, to hear him talk about JAYSUS STRESS!!!!

Why?

I found this topic inexplicably stressful;).

Repeat anything for long enough and people believe it. The media drive the national rhetoric no matter who does these surveys. If this hadn’t been on every single radio show today the results of this survey would be forgotten in a day.
Instead every other show this week will interview health experts & wellbeing gurus for solutions to the “stress” we’re all apparently suffering from now. More classes will be needed in schools for the stressed kids, more employers being directed to have meditation rooms and dolphin music at work . Everyone screaming at everyone to do something about all this stress !

These topics are analyzed to saturation point by our media, to keep them in jobs, and a nation of people believe every single word! :rolleyes:

Redneck Culchie

Faugheen wrote: »

People who have issues with the knicker protest either don't actually realise what the protest was about or they're fine with what happened to cause the protest.

I'd like to think it's the former, however with the dinosaurs in here it's probably the latter.

Please the thought of Ruth waving her knickers around makes me want to throw up.

Huntergonzo

Tell me how wrote: »

Feminist propoganda?

So, do you think the results of the Red C poll were false? What data are you using to back up your opinion?

Don't know, don't care, that wasn't the point I was making.

Why are we getting these 'results' though? what was the point of that survey? Do we need to hear this sort rubbish every single day?

Redneck Culchie

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Don't know, don't care, that wasn't the point I was making.

Why are we getting these 'results' though? what was the point of that survey? Do we need to hear this sort rubbish every single day?

Divide and conquer stuff. Total anti male agenda.

Huntergonzo

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Divide and conquer stuff. Total anti male agenda.

Divide and conquer, spot on, in the old days religion used to be used to control people, but their day is done, so these days it's men v women. Simple formula, but it seems to be catching on.

Tell me how

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Don't know, don't care, that wasn't the point I was making.

Why are we getting these 'results' though? what was the point of that survey? Do we need to hear this sort rubbish every single day?

What do you think a News focused talk show radio station should cover?

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Divide and conquer stuff. Total anti male agenda.

Total anti-male agenda?

I think ye hear what ye want to hear to be honest. Ciara's show is the only show that takes calls from listeners, you can actually get involved. Hell, she actually lets the listeners set the agenda for the full show once a month.

tayto lover

Tell me how wrote: »

What do you think a News focused talk show radio station should cover?



Total anti-male agenda?

I think ye hear what ye want to hear to be honest. Ciara's show is the only show that takes calls from listeners, you can actually get involved. Hell, she actually lets the listeners set the agenda for the full show once a month.

Lost all respect for that fibber when she said she wouldn't mind living beside travellers.
She would in her hole live beside them.

Redneck Culchie

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Divide and conquer, spot on, in the old days religion used to be used to control people, but their day is done, so these days it's men v women. Simple formula, but it seems to be catching on.

Indeed. Then you have millionaire wealthy women like Ciara and Coppinger acting like the oppressed victims of society. And working class and dirt poor men are some how oppressing them.

Laughable stuff indeed if it wasn't so dangerous. I just avoid Irish TV and radio altogether. Let the Coppingers of this world spew their bile, she just craves attention and votes hence the knickers .

Redneck Culchie

tayto lover wrote: »

Lost all respect for that fibber when she said she wouldn't mind living beside travellers.
She would in her hole live beside them.

I doubt there are any travellers in Greystones where Ciara Kelly lives.

Huntergonzo

Tell me how wrote: »

What do you think a News focused talk show radio station should cover?

Unbiased news I suppose.

Why do you think they highlight womens issues so regularly and mens issues so rarely? And what do you think was the point of their recent survey?

Tell me how

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Indeed. Then you have millionaire wealthy women like Ciara and Coppinger acting like the oppressed victims of society. And working class and dirt poor men are some how oppressing them.

Laughable stuff indeed if it wasn't so dangerous. I just avoid Irish TV and radio altogether. Let the Coppingers of this world spew their bile, she just craves attention and votes hence the knickers .

Alex Jones fan by any chance?

Redneck Culchie

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Unbiased news I suppose.

Why do you think they highlight womens issues so regularly and mens issues so rarely? And what do you think was the point of their recent survey?

I think they want Irish men to commit suicide at even higher rates than they already are. It seems to make them and Irish feminists happy. You would never see stuff on mens issues like suicide, the depraved Irish family courts system (also causes many suicides), fatherhood, various addictions, masculinity, males shortcomings in education etc.

Mod note
This type of posting is not acceptable on the forum, user has already been banned on another radio thread.

tayto lover

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

I doubt there are any travellers in Greystones where Ciara Kelly lives.

Mores the pity. They'd suit each other.

Huntergonzo

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

I think they want Irish men to commit suicide at even higher rates than they already are. It seems to make them and Irish feminists happy. You would never see stuff on mens issues like suicide, the depraved Irish family courts system (also causes many suicides), fatherhood, various addictions, masculinity, males shortcomings in education etc.

Those are all sad realities that generally get ignored or at the very least are paid lip service. Trouble is men (particularly white men) don't make good victims, we're the bad guys you see.

Newstalk are great for reporting on court cases, rape cases very much being their favourite type of court reporting. Don't hear them heading to the family courts too often though strangely (these tend to favour women in the majority of cases, this doesn't fit into their agenda).

Tell me how

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

I think they want Irish men to commit suicide at even higher rates than they already are. It seems to make them and Irish feminists happy. You would never see stuff on mens issues like suicide, the depraved Irish family courts system (also causes many suicides), fatherhood, various addictions, masculinity, males shortcomings in education etc.

Your first sentence is ridiculous.
Last week was Men's health week. They covered it at various times across all shows.

Sleeper12

Tell me how wrote:

Your first sentence is ridiculous. Last week was Men's health week. They covered it at various times across all shows.

It was a good show too. Hopefully it'll become a monthly show

Redneck Culchie

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Those are all sad realities that generally get ignored or at the very least are paid lip service. Trouble is men (particularly white men) don't make good victims, we're the bad guys you see.

Newstalk are great for reporting on court cases, rape cases very much being their favourite type of court reporting. Don't hear them heading to the family courts too often though strangely (these tend to favour women in the majority of cases, this doesn't fit into their agenda).

I don't think men crying in the family courts after having their kids taken away and their life ruined and then paying every penny they have for the privilege suits the feminist/Newstalk agenda

What we do get though is a 24/7 update on any sexual or domestic incident from Cork to Belfast where a woman is the victim. And in many of these cases the man is proven not guilty but that is nearly irrelevant.

meeeeh

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Those are all sad realities that generally get ignored or at the very least are paid lip service. Trouble is men (particularly white men) don't make good victims, we're the bad guys you see.

What are you on about, all this thread is about is how hard men have it. I think those of you in this thread are very good at being a victim so I would worry about that. It's one long whingfest.

ButtersSuki

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

I doubt there are any travellers in Greystones where Ciara Kelly lives.

Well she did say they and their caravans would be welcome on her road when she was on TV. I'd like to see some of them take her up on this generous offer....and her subsequent reaction to it if they did.

Tell me how

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Indeed. Then you have millionaire wealthy women like Ciara and Coppinger acting like the oppressed victims of society. And working class and dirt poor men are some how oppressing them.

Laughable stuff indeed if it wasn't so dangerous. I just avoid Irish TV and radio altogether. Let the Coppingers of this world spew their bile, she just craves attention and votes hence the knickers .

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

I don't think men crying in the family courts after having their kids taken away and their life ruined and then paying every penny they have for the privilege suits the feminist/Newstalk agenda

What we do get though is a 24/7 update on any sexual or domestic incident from Cork to Belfast where a woman is the victim. And in many of these cases the man is proven not guilty but that is nearly irrelevant.

Yet again someone who simultaneously never listens to the station but knows just exactly what is on it at all times.

Huntergonzo

meeeeh wrote: »

What are you on about, all this thread is about is how hard men have it. I think those of you in this thread are very good at being a victim so I would worry about that. It's one long whingfest.

Ah sure not before time chief, we need a bitta balance ;-)

ButtersSuki

meeeeh wrote: »

What are you on about, all this thread is about is how hard men have it. I think those of you in this thread are very good at being a victim so I would worry about that. It's one long whingfest.

I disagree. An awful lot of the commentary on the thread seems to be about how totes amazeballs Ciara is, how wonderful she is, how "brave" she is so to speak, how she's never at fault, never emotional, never hysterical, etc. etc......and how, even when she's wrong, she's right!

I've personally never on this thread claimed men have it hard, and I've never claimed to be a victim. I have used the thread to voice my concern and misgivings about the constant misandristic rants and man-bashing of the unprofessional host. Apparently in the eyes of some however, said host is not to be subjected to criticism based solely on a defence of her sex; which goes against the very principles and foundations of equality itself. The fact that I've said worse about multiple male hosts across numerous threads is ignored as it does not sit well with this audience as it's much easier (and lazy) to label all criticism as sexist. Even when female posters criticise Kelly (and thus inherently you would think removing the sexism argument), that's not considered valid by her defenders.

I've never once criticised her for being a woman. I've criticised her for the nonsense that comes out of her mouth - in the same way that I criticise Joe Duffy
for his buffoonery, death and misery fetishes and amateurishness almost daily; previously criticised Paul Williams constantly (until his recent departure) for his gross exaggeration and tabloid style of "journalism", and continue to criticise Alan Quinlan for being out of his depth.

You say the thread has become one long whingefest - a question then, do you think the Ciara Kelly supporters apparent refusal to see any fault in her performance contributes to this?

meeeeh

I got to totes amazeballs and stopped reading...

ButtersSuki

meeeeh wrote: »

I got to totes amazeballs and stopped reading...

Do you stop listening to Ciara when she says it? I suspect not, and she has said it - and more than once. I put it in italics to highlight that it was an expression she has used in the past, but again, as any criticism of her doesn't suit you, you dismiss the entire post (and not just it) out of hand.

I also note that once again (and most certainly not for the first time) you refuse to answer the question asked of you. I don't however understand why how you can't have a debate/conversation without having to resort to such tactics? I haven't been rude or uncivil to you, and yet you react as such?

Huntergonzo

meeeeh wrote: »

I got to totes amazeballs and stopped reading...

Hahaha well then how the hell do you know this whole thread is just "one long whingfest" when you give up reading posts so early on.

Nighty night meeeeh.....if you bothered reading this far ;-)

Huntergonzo

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Do you stop listening to Ciara when she says it? I suspect not, and she has said it - and more than once. I put it in italics to highlight that it was an expression she has used in the past, but again, as any criticism of her doesn't suit you, you dismiss the entire post (and not just it) out of hand.

I also note that once again (and most certainly not for the first time) you refuse to answer the question asked of you. I don't however understand why how you can't have a debate/conversation without having to resort to such tactics? I haven't been rude or uncivil to you, and yet you react as such?

Some people only want to consider their own opinions I suppose, other people's opinions are an irrelevance to them.

meeeeh

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I also note that once again (and most certainly not for the first time) you refuse to answer the question asked of you. I don't however understand why how you can't have a debate/conversation without having to resort to such tactics? I haven't been rude or uncivil to you, and yet you react as such?

I said before I hate the expression. I often listen to Ciara Kelly and I didn't hear her use it. But I'll take you at your word although you claim you don't actually listen to the programme.

You can ask a question again without childish phrases and I will answer it. But don't think you are entitled to answer to a post which drips of contempt and hyperbole after couple of lines.

meeeeh

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Some people only want to consider their own opinions I suppose, other people's opinions are an irrelevance to them.

Some opinion are bellow consideration.

givyjoe

meeeeh wrote: »

I got to totes amazeballs and stopped reading...

How convenient. Wouldn't want to read anything that might challenge your views. Amazeballs.

ButtersSuki

meeeeh wrote: »

I said before I hate the expression. I often listen to Ciara Kelly and I didn't hear her use it. But I'll take you at your word although you claim you don't actually listen to the programme.

You can ask a question again without childish phrases and I will answer it. But don't think you are entitled to answer to a post which drips of contempt and hyperbole after couple of lines.

Re. your post in bold, I've clarified this several times, here's an abridged and somewhat edited version from a former reply to this very same question:

(A) I don’t listen to the show daily out of choice
(B) I have caught snippets/segments of the show in public places
(C) I have - out of choice, freely and voluntarily - listened to the show or parts of the show both live and on the listen back feature.

So whilst I'm not an avid and everyday listener, I do listen to the show.

Why do you feel my post is dripping with contempt and hyperbole? How so? Can you read my intent? Why is it that you feel any question directed at you or Ciara is contemptuous? Why do you have to attempt to turn every debate into a personal attack? You implied the previous poster's to this opinion wasn't worth consideration and you're saying I'm using childish phrases (when I was quoting someone else). Can you not debate the question without resorting to such tactics? I'm curious as to whether you deem it to be a childish phrase when Ciara uses it, regardless of your hate for the phrase or not?

The question I asked was:
You say the thread has become one long whingefest - a question then, do you think the Ciara Kelly supporters apparent refusal to see any fault in her performance contributes to this?

My own thoughts on this - seeing it from both sides - is there is most likely an element of truth in what you're saying, but to apportion blame to one side only is IMO, wrong.