2 Feb 2018

And Then, Off Grid...

Let’s see now, that’s the darts walk-on girls gone and then yesterday came the not all together surprising announcement that the formula one grid-girls have been consigned to some less puritanical point in past history.

When will these fembullies call it a day? What exactly are they trying to achieve? What’s the ultimate aim? Will they finally be happy when no young ladies are allowed out of the house unless they’re dressed in some sort of all encompassing head to toe black cloak? Haaay, hang on just a multiculti moment there...

Bearing in mind that a bikini clad lady advertising a reminder to other ladies to get beach fit for summer was banned from the London underground advertising hoardings not all that long ago, it’s not too hard to spot the direction of travel we’ve been tightly wound up and set off on is it?

Anyhoo, that would be one small step for a fembully and a giant leap backwards for womankind then. What should concern us is why everyone instantly hoists the white flag and surrenders to these minority groups and thus who’s going to be coming for who* or what next.

It’s the weekend so let’s go back a ways to less complicated times. By-the-by, those of you blessed with eagle eyes will note that there doesn’t seem to be a smartphone anywhere about the place thus one has to assume that none of those pictured had a Farcebook presence or even a Twatter account. I mean, really, how did they, like, fill their time?


You think our modern ‘progressive’ snowflakes could handle those heady far away days?


Quote;  Barry Humphries.

“Political correctness means nothing to me. Nothing. It's the new Puritanism, darling. Preventing us from expressing ourselves.”


Caratacus said...

Found this in my peregrinations about the interweb and wondered whether you thought it as worthy of attention as I did (with ref. to Teddy boys et al):

In his 1624 book "The Wise-Man's Forecast against the Evill Time", Thomas Barnes, the minister of St. Margaret's Church on New Fish Street in London, bemoaned: "Youth were never more sawcie, yea never more savagely saucie . . . the ancient are scorned, the honourable are contemned, the magistrate is not dreaded".

Nearly 400 years have passed and one is entitled to wonder if much has changed ... or if it is likely to in the future.

Mac said...

One has to wonder what the good Thomas Barnes would make of those times, assuming his heart didn’t give out too quickly.
The youth of every generation has a need to rebel against something but how we’ve arrived at a generation of young folk who’s idea of rebellion seems to revolve round being continually upset, offended and in constant need of a safe space, leaves me a tad bemused.
The evolutionary process has been a long, hard climb; from sea to land to trees to caves and ever onwards and upwards. You think we’ve peaked and are now careering down the other side with no breaks? Are there already talks taking place in the deep oceans regarding them hitting the beaches again for another go?

Ripper said...

"The youth of every generation has a need to rebel against something but how we’ve arrived at a generation of young folk who’s idea of rebellion seems to revolve round being continually upset, offended and in constant need of a safe space, leaves me a tad bemused."

On the contrary Mac, we've arrived at a generation of nasty little trots, very dangerous creatures who think that violence is the way to silence alternative views - Antifa, Momentum etc. Have you seen the video of the student hitting out at the Jacob Rees Mogg speech? Some commenters in the Daily Wail who are just to the left of Trotsky are painting him as an angel, but why would any respectable young man turn up to a speech, in a well lit, well heated room wearing a hoody (with hood up) and dark glasses? In fact he stood out like a sore thumb and any security with half a brain cell would have had him out of there well before it started.

Mac said...


I take your point.
Follow this link to read a pretty good take on both sides of the JRM argument:


Then this picture says so much so simply:


and then we have a picture that poses an interesting thought:


Finally, here’s one of those things you wish you’d thought of and is about the cleverest way I’ve seen to quote a quote. So clever, I had to read it a couple of times before the penny dropped...
“As I used to say before some Burke stole my quotation 200 years ago, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Ripper said...

Mac - the Spiked article was a good read and in some areas is food for thought. However one of the commenters, "Peter from Oz" just about sums up my take on the subject. And to quote a quote for you, though I am too historically ignorant to know who originally said it (its mostly attributed to Voltaire but also a number of others) - "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

Mac said...

Oh boy! Voltaire! I used to live next door to him and once he got started he'd never shut up... No, sorry, I'm thinking of Walter and his favourite saying was, "Too many crooks dilute the pot."

Ripper said...

Aha ha! I can see I take this too seriously Mac!

Mac said...


Here you go my friend drink these words down and I do believe I'll post the words tomorrow. Thanks for the memory jog;