Dwarf wrestling banned from uk venues

Yer Da sells Avon

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

One of my good friends has a form of dwarvism. He’s an extremely successful businessman who is by far the richest in my circle of friends.

I bet he's Happy.

wexie

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

People mention the loss of income. People lose their jobs all the time.

Yeah but not because people are 'offended'

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

They go out and find another job. It’s the same for these people. They are no different. I mean, none of the banned jobs mentioned above are exactly long-term careers. It’s just bringing forward the inevitable. And as someone who doesn’t subscribe to the “if you’re pretty with a great bod, you must be dumb” way of thinking, I think they’ll be fine and the same goes for folks with dwarvism.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just think it's a load of bollox that these guys have a choice taken away from them because other people are 'offended'.

If you're offended by dwarf wrestling, well fine, don't go watch.

I'd be offended watching obese drag queens perform, which is why I don't watch them. But I'm not campaigning to stop them performing either.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

wexie wrote: »

Yeah but not because people are 'offended'




I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just think it's a load of bollox that these guys have a choice taken away from them because other people are 'offended'.

If you're offended by dwarf wrestling, well fine, don't go watch.

I'd be offended watching obese drag queens perform, which is why I don't watch them. But I'm not campaigning to stop them performing either.

Look, I don’t agree with any of the mentioned bannings at all. The choice should be there. But the hand-wringing over loss of income honestly comes across really patronising to me. Someone inform my friend and Peter Dinklage that wrestling is all that they are fit for. And those purdy girls only have the brainpower to walk and hold up cards.

wexie

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Look, I don’t agree with any of the mentioned bannings at all. The choice should be there. But the hand-wringing over loss of income honestly comes across really patronising to me.

Yeah maybe, to be honest to me the loss of income would be secondary to the loss of choice. And especially if that loss of choice is driven by people getting offended on behalf of other people who weren't the least bit offended themselves.

Rjd2

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

People mention the loss of income. People lose their jobs all the time. They go out and find another job. It’s the same for these people. They are no different. I mean, none of the banned jobs mentioned above are exactly long-term careers. It’s just bringing forward the inevitable. And as someone who doesn’t subscribe to the “if you’re pretty with a great bod, you must be dumb” way of thinking, I think they’ll be fine and the same goes for folks with dwarvism.

Yes many lose there jobs, but not many lose there source of income so some other tedious bore can virtue signal.

A person who also suffers from Dwarfism who is a county councilor and actor spoke about it below. Totally agree.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45507520

Mr Lusted, a TV presenter, motivational speaker and county councillor, says those involved in the event deserve the opportunity to perform.

"If they want to wrestle then let them crack on. If you don't agree with it don't go," he told BBC Radio Wales.

"I'm really frustrated the shows have been cancelled.

"That's how they've chosen to live, that's how they've chosen to support their families, pay their bills. Why don't we just encourage and support them in that.

"These professional entertainers, they're well trained and fit but they're actually going to lose finances now. I feel sorry for them."

dxhound2005

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Just like the walk on girls in darts and the grid girls in F1, I’m sure the dwarf wrestlers will be delighted to lose their income in the name of political correctness.

The girls and the dwarfs could get together and make films.

wexie

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The girls and the dwarfs could get together and make films.

I would imagine that too will be banned in time.

It's how all those poor donkeys ended up in the sanctuaries

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yes many lose there jobs, but not many lose there source of income so some other tedious bore can virtue signal.

A person who also suffers from Dwarfism who is a county councilor and actor spoke about it below. Totally agree.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45507520

My point is that those who mention loss of income can’t seem to envisage how they would earn a living if not for the wrestling (or holding up scorecards and wearing bikinis in the case of the girls). And that comes across to me as insulting and patronising the very people they purport to defend in the rush to rail against political correctness. I like to view things in as logical a way as I can.

I don’t agree with any of these things being banned. But I don’t think the bannings are catastrophic either. All the above careers are short-term. Some likely aren’t even that well-paid. A change of career would be on the cards in the near future anyway.

sightband

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Whilst I don’t agree with any of these bannings, why do people make out like this is the only employment open to any of the banned? That’s actually pretty insulting towards the darts girls, pit girls and dwarves, like all they have is their looks or lack of height. Couldn’t possibly have any smarts, right? One of my good friends has a form of dwarvism. He’s an extremely successful businessman who is by far the richest in my circle of friends. I doubt banning these things is going to leave anyone destitute.

I’m guessing it’s no different to the rest of us, some of them are thick and can avail of a certain ‘talent’ that they have which is in demand. Other side of it is they are of average ability and instead of selling laminate flooring in Woodies they can make a lot more getting tossed or wrestling. Then there’s your pal who is very able and successful. There’s just less of them with a niche which could be very profitable. Bit like a lad with a twelve inch flute.

suicide_circus

I thought dwarves were mythical beings

colm_mcm

suicide_circus wrote: »

I thought dwarves were mythical beings

That’s gnomes you’re thinking of.

Wheety

It's the world we live in now with people getting offended on behalf of others. I'd say the people who complained are feeling very smug now.

It's like the story of Robbie Williams asking a trans singer what their birth name was. People on social media going mad, saying how dare Robbie "deadname" this person. The singer tweeted to say they weren't bothered.

A cop in England has been suspended because he used the phrase "Whiter than white" while talking about how they should be beyond reproach. Someone complained.

Will I Am Not

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

My point is that those who mention loss of income can’t seem to envisage how they would earn a living if not for the wrestling (or holding up scorecards and wearing bikinis in the case of the girls). And that comes across to me as insulting and patronising the very people they purport to defend in the rush to rail against political correctness. I like to view things in as logical a way as I can.

I don’t agree with any of these things being banned. But I don’t think the bannings are catastrophic either. All the above careers are short-term. Some likely aren’t even that well-paid. A change of career would be on the cards in the near future anyway.

I mentioned it and that’s not what I meant at all. If someone was getting offended on your behalf and had your job (that you voluntarily applied for) taken away from you, you’d be pissed off too. There won’t be somebody standing there waiting to give you another. You’ll have to go out and apply and possibly go on social welfare until you get something. Nobody said anything about not being able to get another job ever again.

sightband

suicide_circus wrote: »

I thought dwarves were mythical beings

Belter of a gag...hats off.

Mookie Blaylock

colm_mcm wrote: »

That’s gnomes you’re thinking of.

No, sure we have one of those as president

TheValeyard

Mookie Blaylock wrote: »

No, sure we have one of those as president

That's a Hobbit you're thinking of.

TheValeyard

Hobbits are different from Gnomes, who in turn are different from dwarfs and are not connected in any way to Little People.

jbt123

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Hobbits are different from Gnomes, who in turn are different from dwarfs and are not connected in any way to Little People.

Ahh... Lilliputian a sock in it....

Keyzer

I'm really offended by all of this.

storker

Interesting thread. I'd be against the ban. Unfortunately the human race has never been short of busybodies who can't stand the idea of people doing things they don't like.

At the other end of the scale, I wonder what Game of Thrones has done for perception of dwarves. When I first watched it I hadn't read any of the books and when I saw Tyrion in the brothel I rolled my eyes and thought "...they're scraping the bottom early here..." and was later pleasantly surprised to see him become such an engaging, entertaining and critical character. Hats off to JRR Martin for writing it that way in the first place and the TV showrunners for leaving leaving it like that (even if they went a bit easy on his facial injuries later) and not replacing him with a six-foot hunk because it would be more "relate-able" to audiences, or something.

(Although to be fair, they would have been crucified by book fans and would have had to drop a lot of references and back story to make if half-work.)