Let's all take Blindboy seriously now...

Brian? wrote: »

.

So what. Some of the criticism on here is absolutely ridiculous. The cover of his book? So what.

Just to be clear, at the time I viewed him as a serious artist (or someone trying to be), not someone who ran their work by the marketing department.

I don't mind him going for bigger sales, part of me respects it, but not the part of me that thinks he has any integrity as an artist for doing so.

What?..I just did..And anyway..This is the whole thing..where does the character begin/end..

Like, tbh, I'm not really pushed about the bandits..leave them off..there's plenty bad comedy in the world..but then trying to talk about mental health after making a joke about selling ten spots..and the feminism craic was just deliberately provocative, and ill thought out..I dunno man..

The_Kew_Tour

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

So he is wrong about feminism, or specifically, the faux oppression of women in the modern day. So what?

Edit: anyone listen to Bill Burr's podcast where he constantly takes the mick out of his wife, women, and snowflakes?

What you on about?

Did you even read my post

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

the ad hominem is usually backed up with valid criticism. I don't see much of a problem.

I know you don’t. But I disagree.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Apologies..you did..

Can you read what I said again please.

I did not say all the criticism was personal. Can you acknowledge that?

You said it was criticism of him as a person..which many would consider personal..

And, for the most part it hasn't been..It's been criticism of a character..

Jesus, I think the fourth wall has collapsed..

Outlaw Pete

Brian? wrote: »

So what?

What do you mean 'so what' ?

You complained that Blindboy was being attacked personally but yet backslapped a post which attacked users on this thread personally, calling them 'angry loopers'. You don't see the hypocrisy in that? Ha.

Some of the criticism on here is absolutely ridiculous. The cover of his book? So what.

You said the 'majority' of the critism, some comments about his bloody book cover hardly constitutes as that.

No, it hasn’t. It’s been mostly petty insults. He’s been called a hypocrite, a spoofer etc. . That’s not criticism of his work.

Absolute rubbish that the critisms of him have been mostly petty. The bulk of the discussion centred around his contention that depressed young men need feminism the arguments against that were far from 'petty.

As for him being called a hypocrite, he is, and that was shown by the fact that he has sanctimoniously called on men not to objectify women but did so himself for years when it wasn't as frowned upon.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You said it was criticism of him as a person..which many would consider personal..

And, for the most part it hasn't been..It's been criticism of a character..

Jesus, I think the fourth wall has collapsed..

I said most of the criticism. Not all of the criticism. A small difference, but a very important one.

Some people have made very valid criticisms of his work. Most I don’t agree with, but I see no problem with them.

Some people have simply slagged him off. I have s problem with that.

I said most of the criticism was personal. Not all of it. Please acknowledge that.

I would nearly say most of it has been directed at the work..although some has, to be fair, probably been personal..

But, again, the lines are blurred..

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

What do you mean 'so what' ?

So what. Who cares.

You complained that Blindboy was being attacked personally but yet backslapped a post which attacked users on this thread personally, calling them 'angry loopers'. You don't see the hypocrisy in that? Ha.

I don’t. Because it doesn’t exist.

You said the 'majority' of the critism, some comments about his bloody book cover hardly constitutes as that.

Absolute rubbish that the critisms of him have been mostly petty. The bulk of the discussion centred around his contention that depressed young men need feminism the arguments against that were far from 'petty.

As for him being called a hypocrite, he is, and that was shown by the fact that he has sanctimoniously called on men not to objectify women but did so himself for years when it wasn't as frowned upon.

Yeah. Let’s go in circles. I stand by everything I said. If you can’t see how petty the criticism has become by reading the last 10 pages, I can’t help you.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just to be clear, at the time I viewed him as a serious artist (or someone trying to be), not someone who ran their work by the marketing department.

I don't mind him going for bigger sales, part of me respects it, but not the part of me that thinks he has any integrity as an artist for doing so.

How in the name of god does a writer lose integrity for not choosing the cover of their book? The most irrelevant part of the book. The contents weren’t chosen by the marketing department

HappyAsLarE

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

What you on about?

Did you even read my post

I did but am unfamiliar about the tweets you referred to.

He's made a career out of slagging off an entire section of society for **** sake

Brian? wrote: »

How in the name of god does a writer lose integrity for not choosing the cover of their book? The most irrelevant part of the book. The contents weren’t chosen by the marketing department

How do you know the contents weren't chosen by the marketing department? What else does he decide by committee? Etc.

All that said, he's making his living and his art, people dig it, fair play to him.

Lash Into The Pints

The way I see it Blindboy is like Liberace. It's an act, a joke, a character. Naturally people will get tired of your gimmick and when that happens the blowback is usually quite savage.

Blindboy may a very nice man but when you go down the humourless sjw route..well it's hard not to fight back when you're bombarded with that s h ite.

Here's a thought: why doesn't he reinvent himself as the anti-sjw? Mock the feminists and liberals?

flookdgates

I've never listened to Blindboy's podcast for more than 10 minutes before because I've no interest in listening to the pseudo-intellectual ramblings of a posh college graduate putting on a fake accent and pretending to be working class. However I had to download the latest episode when I heard he addresses his online critics in it. I was howling with laughter throughout. Of course he dismisses his critics as begrudgers (classic Irish excuse) all the while sad piano music is playing in the background.

It is 100% confirmed that he reads this thread so this message is aimed directly at him: I will probably never agree with your hypocritical pontificating about toxic masculinity but I could at least respect you if you took the silly bag off your head, spoke in your real voice and dropped the character charade. What's your Boards username? Let's have an actual two-way discussion instead of lecturing from the pedestal of your podcast and engage with the counter-arguments.

flookdgates wrote: »

I've never listened to Blindboy's podcast for more than 10 minutes before because I've no interest in listening to the pseudo-intellectual ramblings of a posh college graduate putting on a fake accent and pretending to be working class. However I had to download the latest episode when I heard he addresses his online critics in it. I was howling with laughter throughout. Of course he dismisses his critics as begrudgers (classic Irish excuse) all the while sad piano music is playing in the background.

It is 100% confirmed that he reads this thread so this message is aimed directly at him: I will probably never agree with your hypocritical pontificating about toxic masculinity but I could at least respect you if you took the silly bag off your head, spoke in your real voice and dropped the character charade. What's your Boards username? Let's have an actual two-way discussion instead of lecturing from the pedestal of your podcast and engage with the counter-arguments.

Paging Dannyriver, paging Dannyriver (He's Blindboys "friend"

)

Relikk

Brian? wrote: »

The most irrelevant part of the book.

Not really. Without knowing what is contained inside it, the cover plays a very important part in how the book is perceived as it's the very first thing you see when looking at one. It's there to make an impression and to give you some idea of what, or who it's about.

s7ryf3925pivug

Relikk wrote: »

Not really. Without knowing what is contained inside it, the cover plays a very important part in how the book is perceived as it's the very first thing you see when looking at one. It's there to make an impression and to give you some idea of what, or who it's about.

Unless you're self publishing - or you're primarily an artist or designer - you're not picking your own cover. If you're writing your first book, then that is even more certain.

A lot of petty criticisms on this thread, but this one is one of the pettiest.

listermint

Lash Into The Pints wrote: »

So...if you dislike the Rubbrbandits you're an angry 'looper' who automatically supports Brexit and Trump? Er ok. Maybe some people just don't like your heroes?

If they want to be preachy sjws, fine, but they have to expect a backlash.

/

Where did i say if you dislike him your a looper?

What i said is angry loopers who take to the internet to give out about him consistently.

That makes you an angry looper.

See the difference.

but sure conflate what i said into something that suits you.

listermint

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Says the chap who thanked a post calling users "angry loopers".

And you're wrong anyway as the vast majority of the criticism of Blindboy on this thread has been focused squarely on the comments that he made.

I call it as i see it.

How can anyone be this angry about a podcast and spend weeks on the internet complaining about it. :pac:

hilarious stuff

Again its the same group of about 10 posters , the same individuals that use terms like triggered, sjw, lefty, go around blowing their horns about Trump and brexit, anti EU.

The transparency is there for all to see. Lads yiz are in the minority in the real world. But you can scream down the internet with your meme like behaviour all ya like.

Im amused.

SnazzyPig

listermint wrote: »

I see the venom and bile is still pilling in.

Weirdly it's enough it's the same angry loopers that hang around he politics threads advocating for trump and brexit.

I don't think ye even care for the subject matter it's the winding people up being outrageous that gets ye off.

Anything to oppose the center , of pretty much any subject.

If only there was a name for it

I've just had a quick check of the three Trump threads on the first page of the Politics forum and there's no overlap with this thread.

Of course it could just be a case of you 'feeling' there's one there.

DickSwiveller Returns

listermint wrote: »

I call it as i see it.

How can anyone be this angry about a podcast and spend weeks on the internet complaining about it. :pac:

hilarious stuff

Again its the same group of about 10 posters , the same individuals that use terms like triggered, sjw, lefty, go around blowing their horns about Trump and brexit, anti EU.

The transparency is there for all to see. Lads yiz are in the minority in the real world. But you can scream down the internet with your meme like behaviour all ya like.

Im amused.

That's a good description of your post. You're not Blindboy himself are you??

Wibbs

listermint wrote: »

Again its the same group of about 10 posters , the same individuals that use terms like triggered, sjw, lefty, go around blowing their horns about Trump and brexit, anti EU.

Well I for one think he's talking bollocks on a few subjects and don't use such terms, think Trump is a dangerous overgrown toddler, Brexit a monumental disaster for Britain(not so great for us either) and the EU mostly a very good thing, especially for Ireland(save for the not so accountable eurocrats). It's easy to just assume counterarguments can be group labelled, as both extremes tend to, but sometimes somebody is just talking bollocks.

In next week's Podcast, Blindboy to take a page out of Hillary's book and blame his critics as deplorables/Russians

Relikk

Raven Rancid Slime wrote: »

Unless you're self publishing - or you're primarily an artist or designer - you're not picking your own cover. If you're writing your first book, then that is even more certain.

A lot of petty criticisms on this thread, but this one is one of the pettiest.

Not the point I was making, but I don't disagree, on both statements.