Dave perry

active 1 week, 2 days ago
active 1 week, 2 days ago
  • There appear to be a lot of groups who seem eager to be offended on behalf of others. These groups are probably bigger than those allegedly being offended.

  • Work provided them with a series of counseling sessions, which apparently helped a bit, but they ended a few months back.

    Could you look into continuing the counseling out of your own (collective) pocket? That’s what I did when I found myself in a comparable situation a few years back. Likely only your partner could say whether the cost would be worth it.

    I was reasonably fortunate in having a counselor who only required me to pay her what I thought the sessions were worth. I reckoned that it was worth at least as much as a good session of physio for a soft tissue injury, so paid her around the same as I’d previously done for that, and she seemed happy. (Obviously, if I not paid anything she wouldn’t have expected me to come back!)

    I’d also second other posters’…[Read more]

  • Dave perry replied to the topic BT Broadband Scam? in the forum General Chat 3 months ago

    My home’s BT broadband has about the same speed as old 56k dial up.

  • Interesting, but not as much fun as being outraged.

  • Just reading this https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/09/dementia-sell-home-britain-health-lottery

    and this jumped out

    “He hinted that younger people might take out social insurance for their care needs in old age, as part of an “equitable” approach to funding.”

    So what was all the National Insurance I have paid all about then?

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 1 week ago

    That seems weak to me. I know that the media are very keen to highlight dishonesty by politicians (a good thing on balance). But there doesn’t seem to be anything overtly contradictory in those statements:

    1. “A fall in police numbers is likely to have contributed to a rise in serious violent crime…”

    2. “serious violence was a ‘complex crime’ and ‘not all about police numbers’ ”

    At most it is a difference in emphasis.

  • Old school for chip pans was a wet tea towel thrown over it.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 2 weeks ago

    Something here

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/money/2015/aug/29/women-in-20s-earn-more-men-same-age-study-finds

    In the Guardian, to be fair. Seems to be condradicted by the ONS link higher

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 2 weeks ago

    ‘Personally I agree with their UK citizenship being removed ‘

    I totally don’t. Citizenship is not the gift of government, the can’t bestow it or withdraw at will. If you are a UK citizen that’s it.

    And as for these scumbags; great. They are UK citizens, so subject them to UK law, which will result in them being locked up forever. Nor martyred; just pathetic.

    • Depends on the nature of their citizenship. Citizenship can be bestowed; naturalisation, etc.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    I’m aware of the persecution of Jews throughout history, admittedly I wasn’t aware of all the items in your list, but again I’m not sure I need to be.

    If you against racism in general then you really don’t need any historical background, indeed it could be said to people without the history, “well there’s no history of abuse, so why are you complaining?”

    • But the centuries-old conspiracy theories woven into anti-Semitism are what makes it more insidious than bog-standard racism. Racism against blacks or Asians tends towards what they *are* (savages, 3/5 of a human, smelly, whatever horrid minimisations people can come up with), whereas hatred against Jews is motivated significantly by anti-Semites’ view that Jews mean us ill (New World Order, Protocols of the Elders of Zion, blood sacrifices, f*cking “Rothschild”, no Jews died in 9/11 because Mossad tipped them off, etc, etc, etc), which gives people not normally pre-disposed to racism a reason (in their heads) that this particular kind of racism is justifiable. It’s incredibly dangerous.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    That’s a good point. but it can also work the other way around, the word gay has now changed from being an insult to just a word now, so things can change. If everyone took offence to being called gay it would once again become an insult.

    But I think you have hit on something valid there, from my son’s (half cast) point of view, it’s the casual stuff that bothers him more, getting stopped at the airport pisses him off, because he rarely get through without a search. Though in other spheres he’s not that touchy, again it comes down to intent I think.

    • I’d argue that in liberal western countries it’s not that the word gay has changed from being an insult so much as the fact that being gay is no longer seen as odd or shameful (However, that doesn’t make western society right).

      The example you gave of jokingly asking the Jew to look after the money is hideously offensive because the Nazis used the myth of international jewish bankers secretly undermining nations and starting wars as one of their central justifications for the holocaust.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    Sorry to labour the point, but what might be obvious to you isn’t to everyone, and I was trying to gauge someone else’s opinion, not what I thought they might think.

    Supposing something is obvious, doesn’t help someone who doesn’t know, does it?

    Quite often the obvious thing is what’s missing.

    Without knowing other people boundaries it’s difficult to compare to other scenarios or where I might sit in the Venn Diagram of society.

    • Well read up on the history of Germany before 1939 and how Hitler used such issues as portraying the Jews as bankers etc . Then figure out why it is so offensive.

      It is not difficult… in actual fact its so easy to find out and figure it out.

      Your a clever person…I am still amazed you are even asking about boundaries.

      Visit some concentration camps. Go listen to a survivor.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    I’d say it has to do with intent, at least for some instances. But in same vein, some people want to be offended, then obviously there’s the deliberate intention to abuse.

    One of my difficulties, is offence always anti-Semitic? Or is there still a place to be offend and not claim anti-Semitism.

    And of course your correct in the general usage of words, and indeed groups taking offensive language for themselves.

    Case in point, group of lads on a train, looking at their phone discussing girls, “I’m telling you man she’s a Paki”, they were Asian lads, but how do you tell where someone comes from.

    I called them out and suggested they not use the term Paki, they pointed out they were Paki’s. We then talked about how come they don’t mind the word, what about if I called them Paki’s…[Read more]

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    What if it was a friend of his who said it?

    What if he’d said it?

    Is Judaism as race?

    • Judaism is (arguably) both a religion and a race but don’t worry about it.

      I think if there had never been any Jewish converts then the race bit would be pretty solid. But conversions have muddied the waters.

      For instance, because I’m not a Cohen, I don’t know how much (if any) of my long term ancestry goes back to Abraham and how much to converts from over the millennia.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    I didn’t say it wasn’t offensive, I wanted to know if it was anti-Semitic.

    Assuming it might be, I don’t really know hence the question, what if the MP had said it himself?

    Is it offensive then? If it was anti-Semitic when someone else says it, is it still anti-Semitic when a Jew says it.

    Like I said, I have many example of my Jewish friends saying something similar and “other” groups saying roughly the same thing, playing on stereotypes people might put on them.

    • I think the big issue with this sort of stuff is when it feeds into a culture that does real harm, or reinforces the idea that such a culture exists and is acceptable. So with the Hartlepool example I’d probably consider it to be harmless piss-taking among mates in Middlesborough, but totally unacceptable from, say, a posh tutor to a student at Oxford, where you might genuinely feel like you weren’t fitting in and being taking seriously because you aren’t posh and southern enough. Anti-semitism is very obviously problematic under most circumstances because anti-semitic cultures have a nasty habit of committing mass-murder.

      Regarding people taking the piss out of themselves, I think the question of when you start to feed into or reinforce a genuinely harmful culture is context…[Read more]

      • I’d say it has to do with intent, at least for some instances. But in same vein, some people want to be offended, then obviously there’s the deliberate intention to abuse.

        One of my difficulties, is offence always anti-Semitic? Or is there still a place to be offend and not claim anti-Semitism.

        And of course your correct in the general usage of words, and indeed groups taking offensive language for themselves.

        Case in point, group of lads on a train, looking at their phone discussing girls, “I’m telling you man she’s a Paki”, they were Asian lads, but how do you tell where someone comes from.

        I called them out and suggested they not use the term Paki, they pointed out they were Paki’s. We then talked about how come they don’t mind the word, what about if I called them Paki’s…[Read more]

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    from the Jewish Voice UK

    “Today we’ve seen something new & very nasty. Non-Jewish people (mostly Tories) telling Jewish people (who support Corbyn) that they’re Anti-Semitic. In other words Non-Jews condemning Jews as Anti-Semites. What a horrible state Britain is in 2018”

    It was in relation to the protest and Ian Paisley MP, amongst others, being part of the protest. I thought it rather apt.

    Sorry I know this is a little off topic, but there were two counter Jewish groups arguing against each other.

  • Dave perry posted a new activity comment 4 months, 3 weeks ago

    No the Hartlepool on has been around all my life, and was reportedly from the Napoleonic wars.

    So is time an issue in determining, degree of offence (couldn’t think how better to phrase this).

    And while I agree, it’s prejudice (probably *), is all Jewish prejudice anti-Semitism?

    * I can see where this might still be prejudice but not offencive.

    What if the MP had himself made the statement?

    I’ve heard similar from some of my Jewish friends, and given the circumstances where there were a lot of bananas to look after, I might suggest I look after them because of my background.

    • Was it not Hartlepool that elected a monkey? Didn’t know about the history. Maybe more similar then but I still think the Jewish thing is a “bigger” prejudice and has lead to serious results (I understand Hartlepool is dump but I don’t think that’s to do with monkeys).

      • They elected the football club mascot as mayor. The mascot is a man in a monkey suit called “Hangus”. This is because during the Napoleonic Wars a live monkey was washed on the shores of Hartlepool, captured then tried and hung as a French spy.

  • I thought I’d ask what people think about anti-Semitism and where the boundaries are to them.

    Sorry if I offend anyone, this isn’t intentional, but if we don’t discus things we don’t learn.

    There seems to be a confusion over what is and what isn’t anti-Semitism even among those who are telling us what’s acceptable and what isn’t.

    One of the people on the radio a few days ago, he was an MP and he was Jewish, he gave an example of anti-Semitism which I wasn’t sure about. I can’t recall the exact details, so I’m paraphrasing.

    He was a member of a group or team ( I’d don’t know how well he knew the other members, and this might be very important, it would be to me as would the tone with which it was delivered).

    Someone said to him, “I’m glad you on our team, at least we’ve got…[Read more]

    • I’d say both are insensitive and rude. The one about money though links to a huge historical stereotype about Jews that has resulted in all sorts of horrors. The Hartlepool one is just a reference to a transient absurd election and nothing more. I’d say the former a shows prejudice and is arguably anti-semitic, while the later is just crass.

      • No the Hartlepool on has been around all my life, and was reportedly from the Napoleonic wars.

        So is time an issue in determining, degree of offence (couldn’t think how better to phrase this).

        And while I agree, it’s prejudice (probably *), is all Jewish prejudice anti-Semitism?

        * I can see where this might still be prejudice but not offencive.

        What if the MP had himself made the statement?

        I’ve heard similar from some of my Jewish friends, and given the circumstances where there were a lot of bananas to look after, I might suggest I look after them because of my background.

        • Was it not Hartlepool that elected a monkey? Didn’t know about the history. Maybe more similar then but I still think the Jewish thing is a “bigger” prejudice and has lead to serious results (I understand Hartlepool is dump but I don’t think that’s to do with monkeys).

          • They elected the football club mascot as mayor. The mascot is a man in a monkey suit called “Hangus”. This is because during the Napoleonic Wars a live monkey was washed on the shores of Hartlepool, captured then tried and hung as a French spy.

      • from the Jewish Voice UK

        “Today we’ve seen something new & very nasty. Non-Jewish people (mostly Tories) telling Jewish people (who support Corbyn) that they’re Anti-Semitic. In other words Non-Jews condemning Jews as Anti-Semites. What a horrible state Britain is in 2018”

        It was in relation to the protest and Ian Paisley MP, amongst others, being part of the protest. I thought it rather apt.

        Sorry I know this is a little off topic, but there were two counter Jewish groups arguing against each other.

    • Considering Jewish history- yes it is offensive.

      I would watch Simon Schamas’ last programme on Civilisations about Art in the machine world to gain an understanding of why.

      You come across as a thoughtful person.To be honest I am even amazed you are asking the question.

      • I didn’t say it wasn’t offensive, I wanted to know if it was anti-Semitic.

        Assuming it might be, I don’t really know hence the question, what if the MP had said it himself?

        Is it offensive then? If it was anti-Semitic when someone else says it, is it still anti-Semitic when a Jew says it.

        Like I said, I have many example of my Jewish friends saying something similar and “other” groups saying roughly the same thing, playing on stereotypes people might put on them.

        • I think the big issue with this sort of stuff is when it feeds into a culture that does real harm, or reinforces the idea that such a culture exists and is acceptable. So with the Hartlepool example I’d probably consider it to be harmless piss-taking among mates in Middlesborough, but totally unacceptable from, say, a posh tutor to a student at Oxford, where you might genuinely feel like you weren’t fitting in and being taking seriously because you aren’t posh and southern enough. Anti-semitism is very obviously problematic under most circumstances because anti-semitic cultures have a nasty habit of committing mass-murder.

          Regarding people taking the piss out of themselves, I think the question of when you start to feed into or reinforce a genuinely harmful culture is context…[Read more]

          • I’d say it has to do with intent, at least for some instances. But in same vein, some people want to be offended, then obviously there’s the deliberate intention to abuse.

            One of my difficulties, is offence always anti-Semitic? Or is there still a place to be offend and not claim anti-Semitism.

            And of course your correct in the general usage of words, and indeed groups taking offensive language for themselves.

            Case in point, group of lads on a train, looking at their phone discussing girls, “I’m telling you man she’s a Paki”, they were Asian lads, but how do you tell where someone comes from.

            I called them out and suggested they not use the term Paki, they pointed out they were Paki’s. We then talked about how come they don’t mind the word, what about if I called them Paki’s…[Read more]

    • I believe the protesters were calling the Labour party supporters anti-Semitic. One of the protesters was Ian Paisley, though I do believe there were other non-Jewish (I don’t tink Paisley is a Jew – I had to leave the spelling mistake in as it made me laugh – though probably stereotyping again!).

      Since some Labour party supporters are Jewish, we seem to have Jewish people being called anti-Semites, by people who aren’t themselves Jewish, but never the less being supported by other people who are Jewish!!

      Is it any wonder people get confused?

    • I’m not the most sensitive man in the world, certainly not the most PC, but I would say the suggestion that the Jew on a team should automatically “handle the money” is anti Semitic, even if it was said as a joke.

      As for Hartlepool, well that’s a place, not a race.

      • What if it was a friend of his who said it?

        What if he’d said it?

        Is Judaism as race?

        • Judaism is (arguably) both a religion and a race but don’t worry about it.

          I think if there had never been any Jewish converts then the race bit would be pretty solid. But conversions have muddied the waters.

          For instance, because I’m not a Cohen, I don’t know how much (if any) of my long term ancestry goes back to Abraham and how much to converts from over the millennia.

    • The MP’s story. Offensive, to some people yes. Ignorant, maybe. Anti-Semitic, again maybe.

      It all depends on context which includes the background etc of both the speaker and the recipient.

      What if there was a whole history of similar comments but two-way – then it might just be a continuation of some friendly banter.

      One good test of anti-Semitism is to put black instead of Jew in any situation (might require some other changes). Is the result racist? If yes then the original was probably Anti-Semitic.

      Like all these things it’s not black and white. (Should I have said that? Should I have said it’s not jew and gentile? Would that be Anti-Semitic? Does me being Jewish make a difference? Complicated eh?)

    • I would not even dream of asking the question – to me it is obvious.

      I recommend you see the excellent docu film Denial with Timothy Spall playing the holocaust denier David Irving. Gets you thinking and might open your eyes a bit.

      • Sorry to labour the point, but what might be obvious to you isn’t to everyone, and I was trying to gauge someone else’s opinion, not what I thought they might think.

        Supposing something is obvious, doesn’t help someone who doesn’t know, does it?

        Quite often the obvious thing is what’s missing.

        Without knowing other people boundaries it’s difficult to compare to other scenarios or where I might sit in the Venn Diagram of society.

        • Well read up on the history of Germany before 1939 and how Hitler used such issues as portraying the Jews as bankers etc . Then figure out why it is so offensive.

          It is not difficult… in actual fact its so easy to find out and figure it out.

          Your a clever person…I am still amazed you are even asking about boundaries.

          Visit some concentration camps. Go listen to a survivor.

    • The personal offence taken or otherwise, is, to me a secondary consideration. Casual racism, anti-semitism, Christianphobea, etc is an enabler of greater evil.

      • That’s a good point. but it can also work the other way around, the word gay has now changed from being an insult to just a word now, so things can change. If everyone took offence to being called gay it would once again become an insult.

        But I think you have hit on something valid there, from my son’s (half cast) point of view, it’s the casual stuff that bothers him more, getting stopped at the airport pisses him off, because he rarely get through without a search. Though in other spheres he’s not that touchy, again it comes down to intent I think.

        • I’d argue that in liberal western countries it’s not that the word gay has changed from being an insult so much as the fact that being gay is no longer seen as odd or shameful (However, that doesn’t make western society right).

          The example you gave of jokingly asking the Jew to look after the money is hideously offensive because the Nazis used the myth of international jewish bankers secretly undermining nations and starting wars as one of their central justifications for the holocaust.

    • It subtly (or not) changes the environment so that “real” anti-Semitism is more acceptable!

    • So much is based on conditioned stereotypes. I wonder whether the western world’s view of Jews is still that they’re wealthy. Ask yourself (not just you) whether that’s part of your image.

      Sure, some Jews are wealthy, but not all (certainly not me), and there are many poor Jews as well.

      Just in case you or others don’t know, the rich Jew image stems right back to hundreds of years ago when Jews were not allowed to be in other trades or professions but were allowed to be bankers/moneylenders. They needed to make significant charges because so often the kings,queen’s,nobles,etc defaulted on paying loans back by basically kicking the Jews out.

      Amazing that the situation from maybe 700 years ago can still cause stereotypes.

    • Racism has no doubt occurred for ever and everywhere, but in the European context is has centred on the Jews, partly no doubt because they have been the most obvious “others”. In a sense therefore, antisemitism is is “orginal sin” of racism. Hence the outrage at parts of the left being guilty of it and others overlooking it.

      The following is a brief summary of Incidents involving Jews in History…

      135 B.C Antiochus Epiphanes desecrates Second Jewish Temple; leading to Hasmonean Revolt against the Greeks.

      70 A.D. Titus took Jerusalem – second revolt. Over one million Jews killed.

      136 A.D. 580,000 men destroyed, 985 towns destroyed – third revolt.

      300 A.D.Purim festival celebrating God’s deliverance to Mordecai and the Jews through Esther and the fasting. Lies spread that…[Read more]

      • I’m aware of the persecution of Jews throughout history, admittedly I wasn’t aware of all the items in your list, but again I’m not sure I need to be.

        If you against racism in general then you really don’t need any historical background, indeed it could be said to people without the history, “well there’s no history of abuse, so why are you complaining?”

        • But the centuries-old conspiracy theories woven into anti-Semitism are what makes it more insidious than bog-standard racism. Racism against blacks or Asians tends towards what they *are* (savages, 3/5 of a human, smelly, whatever horrid minimisations people can come up with), whereas hatred against Jews is motivated significantly by anti-Semites’ view that Jews mean us ill (New World Order, Protocols of the Elders of Zion, blood sacrifices, f*cking “Rothschild”, no Jews died in 9/11 because Mossad tipped them off, etc, etc, etc), which gives people not normally pre-disposed to racism a reason (in their heads) that this particular kind of racism is justifiable. It’s incredibly dangerous.

  • @jamie You seem to be confusing all data that you could generate, with data that is available to all. Whilst some of your points may have a grain of truth in them, a lot is exaggeration based on tv and films.

    This is what GDPR is all about. If I give consent for my data to be used by company X for their service, they can’t sell it to company Y without my consent.

    There is a big problem with fb, linkedin, twitter et al. Its not skynet, tracking your every thought. Its dull people, posting everything to the world and saying ‘look how interesting and important I am’ then wondering why bad things happen to them.

  • @jamie Please enlighten me – and a few others in what data ‘they’ can gather that would result in a cancelled flight or a car insurance policy suddenly costing me twice enough?

    If my insurance company ups my insurance I simply look elsewhere – don’t you? As for the bit about flying – you’ve lost me there. Why would they?

    As I don’t have a relative with Altzheimers I can’t see that happening, but I appreciate your concern. As I said in my post – don’t put stuff on FB – or anywhere else that you wouldn’t want to share.

  • Load More