nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Let's all take Blindboy seriously now...

Sky King

People do know this is a character right? And not an actual person?

Does it strike anyone else as strange that a made-up persona with a fake voice, parody accent and a fking plastic bag on his head is treated like a normal, regular person in debates and current affairs TV shows? And given the same credibility and respect as an actual real person?

Imagine Fr. Dougal Mcguire, Dustin the Turkey and Fortycoats appearing our incisive current affairs shows discussing mental health with Alan Partridge adjudicating.

Or discussing the 8th amendment and feminism with Mrs Brown, The Bottler and Podge and Rodge? It would be treated like a joke (obviously), but when the prank phone call making, glue-huffing, spastic hawk-toting Blindboy talks serious we all suddenly have to sit up take it seriously.

If I was asked to debate on the same show as a parody character I'd be more than a little pissed off.

By all means share your story on mental health or offer an opinion on our education system. But for fk sake would you give us and the other people on the show the respect of doing it yourself, in a real voice? Without a fking bag on your head?

Alternatively if you prefer holding on to the bag, you could try going back to... you know... being funny. And less preachy.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Relikk

Pter wrote: »

If that person was on the phone and you couldnt see what they were wearing, would it make it different if they were saying the same things? If you didnt know the accent was put on, would it make what is being said different?

Whataboutery...

We know who he is and what he does. He's a character and a parody, who puts on an exaggerated accent and wears a bag on his head. Personally, I find it hard to take that seriously. When members of Monty Python debated religion on a chat show they came as themselves. John Cleese and Michael Palin, if I remember correctly. They didn't come as a Minister of Silly Walks, or as Luigi Vercotti. That, I respect.

Who or what you portray yourself as has to command a certain level of respect, if the person behind Blindboy stopped hiding behind a ridiculous character then I'd take his opinions more seriously (well, maybe not, as I find his pseudo-intellectuallist ramblings to be quite tedious, regardless of his qualifications).

Baggly

Augeo wrote: »

Indeed.

Who'd listen to Dustin the Turkey talk about a serious issue?

So Dustin comes on the radio raising awareness of a children's charity (which is within his area as a childrens entertainer) and you ignore it on the basis that it's coming from Dustin?

[Deleted User]

weldoninhio wrote: »

That’s nonsense. If someone is delivering a message dressed as a clown, their opinion is going to be taken as the opinion of a clown.

Indeed.

Who'd listen to Dustin the Turkey talk about a serious issue?

Boom_Bap

Pter wrote: »

Well my point is that it would depend on what they were saying.

If that person was on the phone and you couldnt see what they were wearing, would it make it different if they were saying the same things? If you didnt know the accent was put on, would it make what is being said different?

Exactly, we don't know what people on the radio are wearing......or what other posters on this forum are wearing.

It's about the content of what is being said.

Baggly

Sky King wrote: »

No.

Would you be happy to debate someone in a debate about a very serious issue (e.g. suicide) if they were using a fake voice, and fake accent and wearing a disguise?

Well my point is that it would depend on what they were saying.

If that person was on the phone and you couldnt see what they were wearing, would it make it different if they were saying the same things? If you didnt know the accent was put on, would it make what is being said different?

Call Me Jimmy

I was a fan of him of him growing up, I found his comedy went downhill (or I matured - doubtful) over the years. His whole 'oh thanks media for doing what I know you will do' shctick here is so disingenuous. It's like saying Michael Jackson DM'd you offering to take your kids for a sleepover, you announce this and expect it not to be reported 'sensationally'... yea bull****

Ulysses Gaze

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'd agree that people have a go at a celeb who becomes an activist. But i think people are very selective and tend to criticise the celeb as a proxy for the issue they support.

for example, Jordan Peterson is a right wing activist who is doing a book tour at the moment. Saying some mildly controversial things to get some publicity and sell a few ore books. I wonder if the same people who get pissy about Blindboy, would get pissy about Peterson for the same reason. I suspect not because the criticism of the person is really criticism of the message they dont like.

Peterson is not a right wing activist. He describes himself as a classic liberal. He's centrist more than left or right in my opinion.

seachto7

I've gotten a bit fed up of his podcasts of late. Telling us about stuff, as if it's some amazing revelation, but it's general knowledge stuff at times. But maybe, as someone pointed out before, a silly c*nt will think it's profound.

weldoninhio

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

By using Blindboy, a caricature, to deliver the message it means the focus is on the message not the presentation of the person delivering the message.

That’s nonsense. If someone is delivering a message dressed as a clown, their opinion is going to be taken as the opinion of a clown.

Woke Hogan

optogirl wrote: »

He has said over and over again that the bag is also about anonymity - he can work a normal job, travel, socialise & go about his daily business without being recognised and that's worth a lot to him.

I'm not talking about his costume, I mean his persona. His persona of the "gurrier artist speaking for the downtrodden youth" is an extension of his artistic expression and it can therefore be criticised or analysed, in my opinion.

optogirl

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I genuinely can't see how anyone in their right mind would think that someone affecting a silly over top persona is the best way to convey a serious message. Imagine if Rod Hull and emu were telling people to check their scrotums for lumps, for example. Nobody would focus on the message then.

He has said over and over again that the bag is also about anonymity - he can work a normal job, travel, socialise & go about his daily business without being recognised and that's worth a lot to him.

Woke Hogan

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sure. In any case Blindboy is a character. It's performance art. The whole point is to remove the surface level details that help to sell an idea like a shiny suit and slicked back hair of a salesman. By using Blindboy, a caricature, to deliver the message it means the focus is on the message not the presentation of the person delivering the message.

That's one of the reasons Jordan Peterson presents himself the way he does. He presents as a middle aged man to help him connect with his primary audience of middle aged men which in turn helps him sell his message that things were better in the old days. There's nothing wrong with using appearance to sell a message. There's also nothing wrong with avoiding using appearance to sell a message. The content of the message should be the most important thing.

I genuinely can't see how anyone in their right mind would think that someone affecting a silly over top persona is the best way to convey a serious message. Imagine if Rod Hull and emu were telling people to check their scrotums for lumps, for example. Nobody would focus on the message then.

[Deleted User]

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That's one of the reasons Jordan Peterson presents himself the way he does. He presents as a middle aged man to help him connect with his primary audience of middle aged men which in turn helps him sell his message that things were better in the old days.

He's such a chameleon!

[Deleted User]

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That's one of the reasons Jordan Peterson presents himself the way he does. He presents as a middle aged man to help him connect with his primary audience of middle aged men

It's stuff like this that makes it super hard to take you seriously.

Sky King

So, you would be happy say, for example, to debate Ross O'Carrol-Kelly (played by an actor) in his stage persona, with his stage voice, on something like Magdelaine Laundries or Tuam Babies scandal or violence against women?

What about a debate between Blindboy and Ross? on something like suicide?

El_Duderino 09

Sky King wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I find it strange when people take issue with him being an artist because he plays a silly character.

He doesn't PLAY a silly character, Blindboy IS a silly character, played by a guy called Dave.

And the issue isn't with him 'being an artist'. That's fine. The issue is with the silly character being taken seriously in debates about serious issues.

if I was asked to debate a character based on an over-the-top horse-riding glue sniffing parody of a limerick skobe in a serious debate I'd tell whoever organized the debate to fk off with themselves and i am amazed more people don't.

Sure. In any case Blindboy is a character. It's performance art. The whole point is to remove the surface level details that help to sell an idea like a shiny suit and slicked back hair of a salesman. By using Blindboy, a caricature, to deliver the message it means the focus is on the message not the presentation of the person delivering the message.

That's one of the reasons Jordan Peterson presents himself the way he does. He presents as a middle aged man to help him connect with his primary audience of middle aged men which in turn helps him sell his message that things were better in the old days. There's nothing wrong with using appearance to sell a message. There's also nothing wrong with avoiding using appearance to sell a message. The content of the message should be the most important thing.

Sky King

Pter wrote: »

So am i right in saying you put more weight in who is saying something vs what is being said?

No.

Would you be happy to debate someone in a debate about a very serious issue (e.g. suicide) if they were using a fake voice, and fake accent and wearing a disguise?

RWCNT

Augeo wrote: »

Worztron wrote: »

So conor mcgregor threatens Blindboy then Blindboy defends cm by groveling? That's pathetic.

What else can "You are a man with a bag on his head, don’t get left in it." mean?

https://www.balls.ie/newsnow/conor-mcgregor-message-to-blindboy-386965
https://www.joe.ie/life-style/conor-mcgregor-blindboy-622441

lol

"I then felt bad because I started thinking about, holy **** if the entire internet is talking about McGregor and he decides to respond to me then that means something I said genuinely probably hurt him and that’s what he needed to respond to.

I never even thought of that, that wasn’t in my head at all.

McGregor just reminded me of how Tupac was behaving. I certainly wasn’t suggesting that he was going to be shot.

And for McGregor to get pissed off about that he’s completely in his rights because you can’t go on Twitter pontificating or ****ing wondering about another human being’s life ending. That’s not my style. I would never do that.

So I just responded back to him, I was embarrassed. I didn’t know what to say, I just responded back ‘Sorry Conor. When I tweet **** like that I forget that there’s a real person behind it all that might be reading it. I’m going to delete it and no I never meant nothing about you getting shot just reminded me of Tupac scrapping in Las Vegas. I’m just spouting internet ****e. Look after yourself'.

For someone who speels on about depression and whatever other populist horsesh1t he sees a few quid in that's a bit of an error isn't it. Lacking in the ole mindfullness dept seemingly.

In fairness, right there in your quoted text he's completely owning up to what you're calling him out for and apologizing.

Also hang on, you consider the issue of mental illness to be "populist bull****"?

El_Duderino 09

Woke Hogan wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Blindboy’s not perfect. You’ve rumpled him.

I find it strange when people take issue with him being an artist because he plays a silly character. He makes a free podcast so he’s free to make whatever he likes. If you like it, grand. If you don’t like if grand. I wasn’t a huge fan of that episode but it doesn’t invalidate the interesting things he’s chatted bout in other shows.

I’ve no idea why he annoys people so much. Is he doing harm in some way? If you aren’t interested in what he chats about, you’re not obliged to listen

Why would you find it strange? I presume you're familiar with the idea of a piece of art being analyzed or criticised.

Ironically, the criticism often surrounds the idea that hes not an artist/wears a bag on his head. Im fine with critique of opinions. It usually seems to be dismissal of the point rather than a counter point.

[Deleted User]

RWCNT wrote: »

Im not a devoted fan of the guy, but people tend to be negative about any celebrity that puts a bit of an activist hat on.

Yeah I do. But it's not really for the reason you gave, it's because I look to celebrities for entertainment usually. Once they enter into a space where they begin to preach on every issue, not just a single issue that they might be passionate about or something they were just asked about, it makes them a lot less entertaining in the same way that a local politician is not all that entertaining. You begin to associate baggage with them instead of just enjoying the superficial layer of entertainment, which is what some of us simply want.
Entertainment = escapism from a complicated and stressful world.

Plus some such celebrities wouldn't be overburdened with brains and the opinions they espouse are just whatever crap is trending on twitter.

Baggly

Sky King wrote: »

He doesn't PLAY a silly character, Blindboy IS a silly character, played by a guy called Dave.

And the issue isn't with him 'being an artist'. That's fine. The issue is with the silly character being taken seriously in debates about serious issues.

if I was asked to debate a character based on an over-the-top horse-riding glue sniffing parody of a limerick skobe in a serious debate I'd tell whoever organized the debate to fk off with themselves and i am amazed more people don't.

So am i right in saying you put more weight in who is saying something vs what is being said?

Woke Hogan

Pter wrote: »

On its merits, not on the basis of who the artist is.

Or should we be running background checks on all artists before we appreciate or slate a piece of art?

His personal background is irrelevant to me but if an artist assumes a public persona for their art, then one would consider that persona to be a extension of the art itself and therefore subject to the same scrutiny the art would get.

Sky King

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I find it strange when people take issue with him being an artist because he plays a silly character.

He doesn't PLAY a silly character, Blindboy IS a silly character, played by a guy called Dave.

And the issue isn't with him 'being an artist'. That's fine. The issue is with the silly character being taken seriously in debates about serious issues.

if I was asked to debate a character based on an over-the-top horse-riding glue sniffing parody of a limerick skobe in a serious debate I'd tell whoever organized the debate to fk off with themselves and i am amazed more people don't.

El_Duderino 09

RWCNT wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve no idea why he annoys people so much. Is he doing harm in some way? If you aren’t interested in what he chats about, you’re not obliged to listen

Im not a devoted fan of the guy, but people tend to be negative about any celebrity that puts a bit of an activist hat on. Many would say it's because they feel the slebs are being disengenius and trying to milk the issues for their own gain, which I'd say can be true but I still give people their due for raising awareness of various issues all the same.

I'd agree that people have a go at a celeb who becomes an activist. But i think people are very selective and tend to criticise the celeb as a proxy for the issue they support.

for example, Jordan Peterson is a right wing activist who is doing a book tour at the moment. Saying some mildly controversial things to get some publicity and sell a few ore books. I wonder if the same people who get pissy about Blindboy, would get pissy about Peterson for the same reason. I suspect not because the criticism of the person is really criticism of the message they dont like.

Baggly

Woke Hogan wrote: »

Why would you find it strange? I presume you're familiar with the idea of a piece of art being analyzed or criticised.

On its merits, not on the basis of who the artist is.

Or should we be running background checks on all artists before we appreciate or slate a piece of art?

Woke Hogan

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Blindboy’s not perfect. You’ve rumpled him.

I find it strange when people take issue with him being an artist because he plays a silly character. He makes a free podcast so he’s free to make whatever he likes. If you like it, grand. If you don’t like if grand. I wasn’t a huge fan of that episode but it doesn’t invalidate the interesting things he’s chatted bout in other shows.

I’ve no idea why he annoys people so much. Is he doing harm in some way? If you aren’t interested in what he chats about, you’re not obliged to listen

Why would you find it strange? I presume you're familiar with the idea of a piece of art being analyzed or criticised.

RWCNT

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve no idea why he annoys people so much. Is he doing harm in some way? If you aren’t interested in what he chats about, you’re not obliged to listen

Im not a devoted fan of the guy, but people tend to be negative about any celebrity that puts a bit of an activist hat on. Many would say it's because they feel the slebs are being disengenius and trying to milk the issues for their own gain, which I'd say can be true but I still give people their due for raising awareness of various issues all the same.

El_Duderino 09

Blindboy’s not perfect. You’ve rumpled him.

I find it strange when people take issue with him being an artist because he plays a silly character. He makes a free podcast so he’s free to make whatever he likes. If you like it, grand. If you don’t like if grand. I wasn’t a huge fan of that episode but it doesn’t invalidate the interesting things he’s chatted bout in other shows.

I’ve no idea why he annoys people so much. Is he doing harm in some way? If you aren’t interested in what he chats about, you’re not obliged to listen

s7ryf3925pivug

Yeah it would have been better if he said -not what i meant, just don't attack buses, it's just being a hooligan Conor.

Woke Hogan

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

If he doesn’t keep it in check then his ego is in danger of reaching a level seen in famous bores like Stephen Fry and Russell Brand.

Like them Blindboy is often seen as an intellectual or an artist by his less-than-intelligent acolytes. For some reason it seems beyond people that an artist would create art rather than bang on about how much of an artists they are all the time.