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

i71jskz5xu42pb

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm wondering if she believes it's ok for a female to use the terms with men but not the other way around.

Context is everything. Surely it can't be difficult to understand why calling someone "love" can be sometimes patronising and sometimes good natured?

Sleeper12

Milan Curved Madman wrote:

Context is everything. Surely it can't be difficult to understand why calling someone "love" can be sometimes patronising and sometimes good natured?

He was English. Many English people call everyone pet or love. It stinks of double standards. Ciara hasn't today suggested that sometimes it's not OK to use these terms. Not once that is heard

buckfasterer

Have a feeling Ciara is gonna run and run with the story from the Ballon D'or last night.

Del.Monte

Good to see Ciara wanting to keep the proles out of university. :rolleyes:

Uncharted

buckfasterer wrote: »

Have a feeling Ciara is gonna run and run with the story from the Ballon D'or last night.

She managed to hold it in for an hour. I'm amazed. She's on her hobby horse now about it as we speak....

Uncharted

I, I, I, me,me,me..... droll biased anecdote , medical experience mention, obligatory cackle ,me, me ,me ..... battle of the sexes chat , me,me,me , us vs them , mention of her kids , men are sexual predators, cackle,cackle.....


How is this person left to host a radio show.
Amateur in the extreme.
Unbelievable.

Barna77

Did she just stop reading a text criticising MeToo?

Uncharted

Barna77 wrote: »

Did she just stop reading a text criticising MeToo?

Yep. Par for the course on lunchtime live it seems. Opinions are more than welcome just so long as they agree with Ciaras.

Sleeper12

Uncharted wrote:

She managed to hold it in for an hour. I'm amazed. She's on her hobby horse now about it as we speak....

In fairness it was a stupid comment to make last night.

Uncharted

Sleeper12 wrote: »

In fairness it was a stupid comment to make last night.

An utterly stupid comment to make. Agreed 100%

Gravelly

Barna77 wrote: »

Did she just stop reading a text criticising MeToo?

Yes - like Moncrieff and that eejit in the mornings, she either refuses to read, or mocks, and message that goes against the right-on dogma.

On a related note - I heard a guy on Newstalk during the week giving out about the Chinese scientist who did the gene editing on the baby recently - he blamed the election of Trump for "enabling this kind of thing" (I swear this is true!).

Tell me how

Gravelly wrote: »

Yes - like Moncrieff and that eejit in the mornings, she either refuses to read, or mocks, and message that goes against the right-on dogma.

On a related note - I heard a guy on Newstalk during the week giving out about the Chinese scientist who did the gene editing on the baby recently - he blamed the election of Trump for "enabling this kind of thing" (I swear this is true!).

If you heard the Future Proof show on Saturday, you'd have heard the host, Jonathan McCrea, speaking very much in favour of the Chinese Scientist while the guest genetic scientist was saying that it was a very dangerous and selfish move by them.

Tell me how

Uncharted wrote: »

She managed to hold it in for an hour. I'm amazed. She's on her hobby horse now about it as we speak....

How dare she bring up one of the worldwide trending articles on Twitter in the last 24 hours.

Truly shocking behaviour.

Gravelly

Tell me how wrote: »

If you heard the Future Proof show on Saturday, you'd have heard the host, Jonathan McCrea, speaking very much in favour of the Chinese Scientist while the guest genetic scientist was saying that it was a very dangerous and selfish move by them.

*whoosh*

Tell me how

Gravelly wrote: »

*whoosh*

Don't feel bad about it, you're in good company here.

Uncharted

Tell me how wrote: »

How dare she bring up one of the worldwide trending articles on Twitter in the last 24 hours.

Truly shocking behaviour.

What's your purpose in quoting my text?
It doesn't reinforce your "attack" at all.
Strange behaviour.

My point was in how long she held it in before raising the issue!

Not that the issue WOULD be raised.... can you actually see the difference or are the goggles welded too firmly to your eyes?

Tell me how

Uncharted wrote: »

What's your purpose in quoting my text?
It doesn't reinforce your "attack" at all.
Strange behaviour.

My point was in how long she held it in before raising the issue!

Not that the issue WOULD be raised.... can you actually see the difference or are the goggles welded too firmly to your eyes?

Brilliant.

Uncharted

Tell me how wrote: »

Brilliant.

Brilliant retort.

meeeeh

Gravelly wrote: »

Yes - like Moncrieff and that eejit in the mornings, she either refuses to read, or mocks, and message that goes against the right-on dogma.

What's wrong with mocking reply. Surely you wouldn't be offended? What about freedom of the speech, people getting offended by everything and so on. Isn't frank discussion what we want and if we think someone is talking nonsense we should be able to say it.

Tell me how

meeeeh wrote: »

What's wrong with mocking reply. Surely you wouldn't be offended? What about freedom of the speech, people getting offended by everything and so on. Isn't frank discussion what we want and if we think someone is talking nonsense we should be able to say it.

Only when what they are saying agrees with our point of view. Keep up.

Uncharted

Tell me how wrote: »

Only when what they are saying agrees with our point of view. Keep up.

..... OUR?

nullzero

Uncharted wrote: »

..... OUR?

Don't go down that rabbit hole.

givyjoe

meeeeh wrote: »

What's wrong with mocking reply. Surely you wouldn't be offended? What about freedom of the speech, people getting offended by everything and so on. Isn't frank discussion what we want and if we think someone is talking nonsense we should be able to say it.

Sweety baby irony jesus.

Mr.H

meeeeh wrote:

What's wrong with mocking reply. Surely you wouldn't be offended? What about freedom of the speech, people getting offended by everything and so on. Isn't frank discussion what we want and if we think someone is talking nonsense we should be able to say it.

She mocked it without reading it.

Frankly i find her as palatable as loose women. Horrible excuse for a presenter who would have no job if it wasnt for newstalk trying to make up for the George hook debacle.

She has been called out on a number of occasions on air for having an agenda. Thinks all guys need to be thought how not to be sexist. She will happily slaughter guys for acting macho and mock the man flu in the same sentence.

anthonyjmaher

Caught a bit of this in the car yesterday. Same usual predictable response from her. What the guy said was obviously silly - and the poor girl was caught a bit off guard with the out of context nature of the question. But it's not enough today to say the guy just said something a little stupid because he was nervous or trying to be funny. It's obviously this MAN trying to demonstrate his superiority over the woman by belittling her sporting achievement. Two core points that Kelly missed were that the guy was mortified and immediately apologised to Ada, and that she didn't even take offence to what he said and only became aware of the controversy when she looked up Twitter. People like Ciara Kelly using what this guy said to drive their own agenda.

And the most ridiculous part of this is that Kelly then used to drive a discussion on lack of coverage for women's sports. The ONLY time that she has ever discussed women's football on the show was when she could use it as a vehicle to drive her own anti man agenda. She said that she has no interest in sport, but it's apparently consistent then to berate men for not watching women's sport, when she hates all sport herself.

I just laugh at the show when I hear it in passing these days. It's so over the top it's like a feminist's Alan Partridge at this stage.

Sleeper12

If anything yesterday's show has proven how few men think comments on twirking at sporting events is the best way to go.

anthonyjmaher

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If anything yesterday's show has proven how few men think comments on twirking at sporting events is the best way to go.

Well you have certainly learned the art of misrepresentation from your hours of listening to Ciara Kelly.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Seems to have zero sense of humour.

Comes across like an old Mother Superior from the 1950s.

Sleeper12

anthonyjmaher wrote:

Well you have certainly learned the art of misrepresentation from your hours of listening to Ciara Kelly.

I haven't read any posts here agreeing with the twirking comment & there were as many men texting in about their embarrassment with the comment. So yes that is what I took from the program yesterday. I'm not saying that's what ciara expected from the program.

FreudianSlippers

This thread reads like an incel circle jerk.