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; } } }

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

[Deleted User]

She's permanently on twitter now tweeting links to wacky stories from a few years ago and every single conspiracy theory she can get her hands on

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ulysses Gaze

Overheal wrote: »

It’s the perfect conspiracy!

Shadowy Irish Cabal in Government: she’s on to us lads what do we do?

SICG intern: I guess we could have some rando throw a milkshake at Justin Barrett?

SICQ: **** that’s brilliant. The NWO will never he stopped now.

That milkshake was bought and paid for by George Soros, Overheal!

Ulysses Gaze

JohnMc1 wrote: »

She's conveniently also an actress. Considering we're in the age of Jussie Smollet fake hate crime I wouldn't be surprised if they're making it up to push hate crime laws.

What exactly is she lying about?

Woodsie1

banie01 wrote: »

Who? Ms Ryan?
Are you saying she "made up" the baby? The relationship and the family life they seem to share?

She is an actress according to the report in the Irish Times,actually said she was an actor but hey thats splitting hairs.

As for Gemma,Ive seen people banned for less than her vitriol.
Why is she still allowed on Twitter?Should be fcuked off into the abyss.

davedanon

Woodsie1 wrote: »

She is an actress according to the report in the Irish Times,actually said she was an actor but hey thats splitting hairs.

As for Gemma,Ive seen people banned for less than her vitriol.
Why is she still allowed on Twitter?Should be fcuked off into the abyss.

These days the word 'actress' is deemed redundant. So no hair needs splitting.

Overheal

JohnMc1 wrote: »

She's conveniently also an actress. Considering we're in the age of Jussie Smollet fake hate crime I wouldn't be surprised if they're making it up to push hate crime laws.

Woah you might be on to something here because this actress helped the family earn some money by having them all get pictured in an advertising gig... in the advertising industry... in which most actors and actresses find meaningful careers.

Your conspiracy theory hinges on what, that actresses are inherently dishonest? It's not possible for an actor to make an honest living? Does this mean that Patrick Stewart is part of the NWO?

davedanon

And, acting may be her profession, but she's in this ad as herself, with her family.

Overheal

Odhinn wrote: »

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/15/80/2c/15802cb74a7386e8dcd5f61cffd84fd3.jpg

https://images.app.goo.gl/tiKy7pQuKtPTJ95v8

Tellin yez now

That's just mean.

Not just because I normally don't like giving attention to buffoonery memes like this (Bush as a nimrod, Obama as an ape, Trump as a hairless ****, etc) but also because I'm re-watching DS9 atm and Armin Shimerman deserves more credit than that.

Woodsie1

davedanon wrote: »

These days the word 'actress' is deemed redundant. So no hair needs splitting.

Is it?.
I always say actress out of habit,but its neither here nor there.
Like ya say in the next post it wasnt an acting job in the ad,just pointing out she is actually and actress actor

Overheal

I'ma still say actress in this case so there's no confusion about which person in the ad that's in reference to.

davedanon

Female 'actors' nowadays like to be referred to as such, so it isn't really 'neither here or there'.

No, she wasn't acting in the ad, so why is her profession (acting) at all relevant?

Woodsie1

davedanon wrote: »

Female 'actors' nowadays like to be referred to as such, so it isn't really 'neither here or there'.

No, she wasn't acting in the ad, so why is her profession (acting) at all relevant?

Relax there,not sure why your so worked up.
Her profession was mentioned in the Irish times and a poster asked was she an actress.

Overheal

I mean sure if someone comes forward to me and says they want to be known as an Actor or even a Female Actor I have no problem with that, however that would not be my personal default, given that on the whole I think most women in the acting and drama professions would prefer to be addressed nonchalantly as actresses in the majority of scenarios.

davedanon

Overheal wrote: »

given that on the whole I think most women in the acting and drama professions would prefer to be addressed nonchalantly as actresses in the majority of scenarios.

You are quite wrong with this assumption, grandad. These days, I think you'll find, thespians are uniformly referred to as...........actors.

_Kaiser_

davedanon wrote: »

Female 'actors' nowadays like to be referred to as such, so it isn't really 'neither here or there'.

And therein lies the problem with so much of this stuff.

Easily offended types trying to bait and entrap others who don't spend their life refreshing the "great Identity politics glossary" (AKA Twitter and Facebook) for the latest revisions into causing some imaginary slight.

Fook that shyte. Context and intent is everything but conveniently ignored by the easily outraged.

davedanon

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And therein lies the problem with so much of this stuff.

Easily offended types trying to bait and entrap others who don't spend their life refreshing the "great Identity politics glossary" (AKA Twitter and Facebook) for the latest revisions into causing some imaginary slight.

Fook that shyte. Context and intent is everything but conveniently ignored by the easily outraged.

'Context and intent'? Please explain. So I don't go all snowflake unduly.

Ha Long Bay

JohnMc1 wrote: »

She's conveniently also an actress. Considering we're in the age of Jussie Smollet fake hate crime I wouldn't be surprised if they're making it up to push hate crime laws.

Making up what? Do you not believe they got abuse online following the Tweet from G.O.D.?

Overheal

davedanon wrote: »

You are quite wrong with this assumption, grandad. These days, I think you'll find, thespians are uniformly referred to as...........actors.

If you say so, and if I meet a lot of these people and the trend is shown to change I will probably change my default to match. Until then.

davedanon

Overheal wrote: »

I'ma still say actress in this case so there's no confusion about which person in the ad that's in reference to.

Why would there be any confusion, when they are both real people: one of whom just happens to be an actor???

Overheal

davedanon wrote: »

Why would there be any confusion, when they are both real people: one of whom just happens to be an actor???

Because saying "Actor" in relation to the Ryans can give people reading the mistaken impression its in reference to her husband.

davedanon

The fact that one of them is in the acting profession is just a footnote, yes?

As opposed to the main storyline, which is that this is a real couple, who auditioned for an ad as such.

Overheal

I agree with all of that.

Sephiroth_dude

pjohnson wrote: »

I dunno. You might just be stupid re how surnames work in general. It mightnt actually be a race issue just an intelligence issue.

How you randomly hashtag patriarchy in this discussion seems to indicate its an intelligence issue.

padd b1975 wrote: »

*mightn't.

Mod

Stop with childish sniping or I'll thread ban both of ye.

Annasopra

Augeo wrote: »

Couple seem a tad snowflakish.

Nah. The couple are genuinely scared because Gemmas supporters who are fascist racist scum are harassing them.

Annasopra

davedanon wrote: »

Why would there be any confusion, when they are both real people: one of whom just happens to be an actor???

It's all a conspiracy. The government secretly hired some actors on behalf of lidl to deliberately enrage Gemma O'Doherty and to goad Gemma O'Dohertys supporters into racially abusing the actors on Twitter. But that didn't happen cause the government paid it's bot service to racially abuse them too. The government press office then hired Kitty Holland to highlight how crap the government's laws are on racist hate and abuse.

[Deleted User]

I'm for that reddit stance of not mentioning her now tbh. The Lidl thing has given her more exposure and she's jumped on it as expected. If she had the courage of her convictions she'd be down doing what she did outside goggle at her local Lidl but she doesn't so it won't happen and even she has to see the hypocrisy of her buy Irish hashtag here

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1178018730846117888

AngryHippie

NickNickleby wrote: »

I truly believe that Irish people on the whole, are not racist.

This is the only quibble I would have with an otherwise very well thought out position.

I think that is a bit naive. My personal belief is that everyone is a bit inherently racist. For the vast majority of us, we can rationalize the little inner racist voice and leave it behind as being the product of our brains pattern spotting and our human nature to be attracted to, and more empathetic to people who look the same as us, speak the same language, share common interests etc.

There are a minority of people who cannot move past this level of thought and they allow difference to turn to discomfort which grows into suspicion, fear and hatred of those who look different.

There is a step missing with these people. For the most part it can be resolved by actually forming a human connection with people who look different, be it the local Indian or Chinese restaurant owners, or someone in school or at a sports club or wherever and discovering....lo and behold, they are just humans, struggling to house clothe and feed their kids just the same as we are. They have similar goals in life and we share the same societal problems across the board.

Lashing out against racism by criticism and ostracism doesn't actually do anything constructive to change that attitude, it only serves to erode our credibility in their eyes as they will use the right wing tools pushed into the social commentary of 'snowflake' branding etc. in order to ignore a reasonable social conscience and delve deeper into their echo chamber.

I'm going to sound like by U_Name here by saying the only way for us to change a racist mentality is by getting closer to them, allowing them to make human connections, growing familiarity and trust and allowing them the space to admit to themselves that they had it wrong, allowing them the time to make some sort of amends for the wrong and giving them credit for it when they do turn a corner. It's not an easy thing to do, but we all have a racist relative or older family member who we have told 'you can't say that' instead of asking 'why do you think that'.

While racism should and must be called out, ostracism for it only serves to make doubling down and moving closer to extreme views an easier option than taking pause and stepping back from what could have been an emotional outburst.

We as a society, public figures, celebrities and commentators in particular need to be smarter than forcing people back to the bottom feeding far right who only exist because the fear and hatred machine has been redlining since the 1950's to justify the military industrial complex and black op budgets that would have solved global poverty by now had they been spent sensibly instead of lining the pockets of the absolute worst humans to currently walk the planet.

but its just my opinion.

Muahahaha

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It's all a conspiracy. The government secretly hired some actors on behalf of lidl to deliberately enrage Gemma O'Doherty and to goad Gemma O'Dohertys supporters into racially abusing the actors on Twitter. But that didn't happen cause the government paid it's bot service to racially abuse them too. The government press office then hired Kitty Holland to highlight how crap the government's laws are on racist hate and abuse.

Now we're getting somewhere, the family on the Lidl ad were clearly crisis actors paid for by Soros.

TaurenDruid

Deleted User wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1178018730846117888

"Lidl did something I don't like. Boycott Aldi."

whippet

Gemma’s circle of life .. get outraged by something ... everyone else points out why she is wrong ... Gemma doubles down on the outrage and invents a bigger conspiracy to fill the massive hole she just dug for herself.

She has feck all support now .. but a small band of headbangers who just want to be outraged ... but these are the dangerous ones

The Nal

whippet wrote: »

Gemma’s circle of life .. get outraged by something ... everyone else points out why she is wrong ... Gemma doubles down on the outrage and invents a bigger conspiracy to fill the massive hole she just dug for herself.

She has feck all support now .. but a small band of headbangers who just want to be outraged ... but these are the dangerous ones

Losers on twitter. The youtube thing fizzled out fairly quickly. Shes just a mouth. Must be severely depressed spending her life doing that.