Author Topic: Super-Twat  (Read 897617 times)

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3025 on: 12 March, 2018, 10:23:29 am »
Get a bicycle. You will never regret it, if you live- Mark Twain

Beardy

  • Shedist
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3026 on: 12 March, 2018, 10:40:19 am »
It's a good job none of us has taken the piss out of May's mannerisms or accent then.
She's so far beyond having the piss taken out of her because the things she says and supports have effectively killed political satire
For every complex problem in the world, there is a simple and easily understood solution that’s wrong.

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3027 on: 12 March, 2018, 10:56:37 am »
People who make personal attacks on May based on the way she speaks rather than what she says are twats as well.

And that doesn't stop Letts being a twat either. As Clarion says, he's trying to undermine the serious point she's making in her speech by belittling her as a person. This goes beyond party political allegiances.

In a similar vein, my wife tells me that the two women off the Nationwide adverts have been receiving death threats, which I find utterly flabbergasting. Their songs are incredibly twee and slightly irritating, but FFS, death threats? That goes beyond mere supertwattery and into the realms of something altogether more vile.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3028 on: 12 March, 2018, 11:09:37 am »
Indeed.  I rather like Flo & Joan, but I can imagine the style might irritate some people.  But....death threats???
Getting there...

ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3029 on: 12 March, 2018, 11:16:52 am »
Tbh, I don't think he is trying to undermine anything, he's making a cheap joke on the supposed unintelligibility of Scottish accents, which is about as ha-ha as it sounds and deservingly twattish. We could make similar jokes about people called Quentin, few of whom I'd hazard are born on council estates. Leastways, not a lot of Quentins in my school, though it would have been a early death sentence so possibly they didn't survive the first day. There's plenty of parliamentary sketch material featuring May's robotic mannerisms. Admittedly it's a bit funnier. No one would make a robot that useless, of course. Some of them can negotiate stairs these days (though that's a lot of steps below negotiating Brexit).

I've no idea about Nationwide adverts and death threats, but if there's one thing social media has taught us, it's that there certainly are a lot of fuckwits out there (and I'm getting less convinced that there is really any upside to social media). I suspect they aren't actually planning to kill someone over a twee song (leastways, not unless it's the Birdy Dance) but lack any filter. Of course, as a cyclist, I'm familiar with people threatening to kill me for any mild to negligible inconvenience I might have caused them. Give these shitbags any kind of anonymity and power and they'll abuse it.

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3030 on: 12 March, 2018, 12:30:56 pm »
Wales! Well specifically Nick Jones : http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-43343710

Eccentrica Gallumbits

  • Rock 'n' roll and brew, rock 'n' roll and brew...
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3031 on: 12 March, 2018, 12:43:18 pm »
Tbh, I don't think he is trying to undermine anything,
I think referring to the meeting as a "ban wolf-whistling debate" is undermining and belittling it.

I wouldn't threaten death to the irritating women in the Nationwide adverts, but I wouldn't mourn the death of whoever approved them for broadcast.
My feminist marxist dialectic brings all the boys to the yard.


ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3032 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:06:29 pm »
Having read his comments and heard her speech, I think he did a good job of making her point for her.

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3033 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:06:38 pm »
I knew a Quentin when I was a Penniless Student Oaf, from one of the rougher parts of Mos Eisley Portsmouth.  But he was of Italian ancestry, so probably in the Camorra.
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3034 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:11:42 pm »
We had a Clareon. It was merciless and horrible. Anyone who thinks their children are nice, not they're not, they're fucking evil little proto-Hitlers.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3035 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:21:46 pm »
Is it patronising then when the BBC introduce subtitles even when the person is speaking English?

It's certainly a fascinating insight into what the programme makers think is hard to hear.  Bad audio gets them about half the time.  Accents seem to be completely random.  Even relatively mild speech impairments seem to get them.

Seems daft, given that they should be subtitling everything in a way that makes them selectable by the user.  But I habitually have the subtitles turned on and almost never watch live TV.  If you're watching live and you've got to go digging in a menu to enable them for a 10 second clip, it's less practical.


Censoring of words in subtitles should be done consistently with censoring the audio and indeed video.  Obviously.  I can understand the production process means this consistency is sometimes lost.  IME it goes both ways - I've seen programmes where the audio has been bleeped or ducked (presumably due to a last minute scheduling decision) and the subtitles are full of glorious swearing.

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3036 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:44:38 pm »
Presumably censoring the subtitles is pointless if the deaf viewer can lip-read.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Tim Hall

  • Victoria is my queen
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3037 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:48:08 pm »
Presumably censoring the subtitles is pointless if the deaf viewer can lip-read.

Isn't there a clip on Youtube or similar where the singer's mouth gets pixelated to avoid Bad Swears escaping?  I might have imagined/mis-remembered this though.
There are two ways you can get exercise out of a bicycle: you can
"overhaul" it, or you can ride it.  (Jerome K Jerome)

ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3038 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:57:54 pm »
Some Americans get very upset by swearing, even the thought of it. As an habitual swearer and part-time grown-up, I find it a bit odd. Like all words, they have their place, but they're genuinely quite useful and I'm pretty sure that, like most people, I had a thorough command of them long before I left school. Do we really need the protection of 'f*ck'? Is it just me to whom this practice seems well, a teensy bit peculiar?

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3039 on: 12 March, 2018, 01:59:12 pm »
Presumably censoring the subtitles is pointless if the deaf viewer can lip-read.

Sort of.  Lipreading video is hard, and subtitles are generally an easier and more reliable altternative to having to do it.
 But who you're writing subtitles for is one of those subtle problems that there's no right answer to.

Many of the deaf viewers will be native English speakers with some degree of hearing, and they generally benefit from the subtitles staying as faithful to the audio as possible (they perhaps only look at the subs to pick up the odd word).  But others will be profoundly deaf sign language natives who don't care about the audio, but benefit from re-phrasing to make the English grammar less confusing.  Others will be somewhere in between.  Hearing non-native English speakers may go either way, depending on whether their main objective is to improve their English or access the content.

And of course many of those signers would rather have an interpreter on screen in their own language.  But some of them have good English and would rather have subs because reading is faster than signing and it gives you more time to watch the content.

DVDs sometimes have multiple subtitle tracks, and sometimes the 'hearing impaired' track does more than just add captioning of noises to the English language subtitles.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3040 on: 12 March, 2018, 02:01:44 pm »
Some Americans get very upset by swearing, even the thought of it. As an habitual swearer and part-time grown-up, I find it a bit odd. Like all words, they have their place, but they're genuinely quite useful and I'm pretty sure that, like most people, I had a thorough command of them long before I left school. Do we really need the protection of 'f*ck'? Is it just me to whom this practice seems well, a teensy bit peculiar?

See also: Sex.

It's the censorship of a little harsh language in a programme in which people are blowing each other to bits that always baffles me.  I mean, as appropriate times for swearing go, when you're being shot at must be pretty high up the list, and it's unlikely to be appropriate viewing for smalls anyway.

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3041 on: 12 March, 2018, 02:30:17 pm »
As a profoundly deaf person myself, I find it highly irritating when subtitles are simplified! I do not wish to be patronised. I don’t get enraged by naughty words displayed in full either.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3042 on: 12 March, 2018, 03:00:47 pm »
It's the censorship of a little harsh language in a programme in which people are blowing each other to bits that always baffles me.  I mean, as appropriate times for swearing go, when you're being shot at must be pretty high up the list, and it's unlikely to be appropriate viewing for smalls anyway.

It's good for kids to watch films with shootin' in.  Gets them ready to defend their Second Amendment RIGHTS against commies like you and Barack HUSSEIN Obama.
Getting there...

Basil

  • Um....err......oh bugger!
  • Help me!
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3043 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:15:37 pm »
Some Americans get very upset by swearing, even the thought of it. As an habitual swearer and part-time grown-up, I find it a bit odd. Like all words, they have their place, but they're genuinely quite useful and I'm pretty sure that, like most people, I had a thorough command of them long before I left school. Do we really need the protection of 'f*ck'? Is it just me to whom this practice seems well, a teensy bit peculiar?

I never understand the pointless typing of the word f*ck.  You've said f*ck.  In the full knowledge that everyone knows you mean fuck.  Therefore you have said fuck.
Admission.  I'm actually not that fussed about cake.

rr

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3044 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:15:41 pm »
Oh yes he was a character?

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk


ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3045 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:19:47 pm »
Some Americans get very upset by swearing, even the thought of it. As an habitual swearer and part-time grown-up, I find it a bit odd. Like all words, they have their place, but they're genuinely quite useful and I'm pretty sure that, like most people, I had a thorough command of them long before I left school. Do we really need the protection of 'f*ck'? Is it just me to whom this practice seems well, a teensy bit peculiar?

See also: Sex.

It's the censorship of a little harsh language in a programme in which people are blowing each other to bits that always baffles me.  I mean, as appropriate times for swearing go, when you're being shot at must be pretty high up the list, and it's unlikely to be appropriate viewing for smalls anyway.

It's a variety of fun to read those 'parental guidance' movies reviews. Profanity and nipples score far more highly than the occasional mass slaying.

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3046 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:25:22 pm »
Some Americans get very upset by swearing, even the thought of it. As an habitual swearer and part-time grown-up, I find it a bit odd. Like all words, they have their place, but they're genuinely quite useful and I'm pretty sure that, like most people, I had a thorough command of them long before I left school. Do we really need the protection of 'f*ck'? Is it just me to whom this practice seems well, a teensy bit peculiar?

I never understand the pointless typing of the word f*ck.  You've said f*ck.  In the full knowledge that everyone knows you mean fuck.  Therefore you have said fuck.
Sometimes, it gets round automated censor programs.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Beardy

  • Shedist
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3047 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:26:02 pm »
On swearing, I’ve never really sworn much1, largely due to an authoritarian father who was also a bit of a bully (although he’d be horrified to be told that) and indeed my children in particular are shocked when I do occasionally swear. However, I’ve sworn more in the last 18 months, since June 2016 in fact, than I had in the 55 years preceding that event. I find that I am more often lost for words than I’ve ever been.


1. With the noticeable exception of the word Bastard, which I find I can really wrap my tonsils around with my broad Yorkshire accent. Although I suppose that’s not technically swearing. 😇
For every complex problem in the world, there is a simple and easily understood solution that’s wrong.

ian

Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3048 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:37:02 pm »
Why do we need automatic censor programs? Honestly, will anyone explode with shock if they learn f*ck is actually fuck. Can there being anything more pleasurable than a good well-deserved swear? People who bundle that stuff inside turn weird.

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Super-Twat
« Reply #3049 on: 12 March, 2018, 04:39:38 pm »
1. With the noticeable exception of the word Bastard, which I find I can really wrap my tonsils around with my broad Yorkshire accent.

Yorkshire accents do indeed lend themselves well to swearing, especially the word 'bastard'...
https://youtu.be/Z0YSbEtna4A
https://youtu.be/lWkiwru0sfQ
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."