the queen’s iz no doubt haunted, and zas why I wouldn’t go near her.

http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/10/30/blood-on-the-carpet/

Brand, Ballie and Ross are all as bad as each now if you ask me.

She’s also done some hardcore lesbian spanking porn

Well, since nobody else here’s mentioned it, I may as well say it: That is one smoking hot lesbian spanking satanic stripper.

As for the clips on Google, Billy I expect you have the gratitude of all those Picklers and lurkers who’ll check that out “for academic purposes” and pretend not to

And as for the “spanking”, well she has been very naughty. That’s all I’m saying.

Okay, on a more serious note:

The point is that a woman’s sexuality was used to insult a male relative, and everyone seemed to find that outrageous for the wrong reasons.

Not quite. The fact that Brand had supposedly (and as it turned out, this has subsequently been confirmed by the other party) slept with the woman was used to needle the male relative, playground schoolboy-style. The total lack of discretion and betrayal of trust by the two comedians concerned is bad enough, but the fact that to some extent Andrew Sachs is a bit of a “national treasure” (thanks to Fawlty Towers etc, although his advanced age obviously also has a lot to do with the reaction) is the reason for much of the outrage.

I guess a residual sense of chivalry also caused outrage on behalf of the woman concerned due to Brand & Ross’s ungentlemanly conduct, and although the lovely Georgina obviously ain’t exactly a shy wilting wallflower who’ll get a fit of the vapours and reach for the smelling salts at the slightest saucy remark, this doesn’t negate the fact that she’s still a human being with the associated emotional sensitivities in relationship matters and therefore deserves to be treated with some consideration.

Although, having said that, she’s not doing her cause any favours by blagging all to The Sun etc, but to each her own. *shrug* Whatever.

I would actually suggest that whether she cares about her reputation does have some relevance here. It is difficult to take up a cause from a feminist standpoint when feminism isn’t really on the ‘wronged’ person’s mind. That, of course, does not excuse misogyny in and of itself. It just makes it harder to use this case as a strong argument.

Whether Baillie cares or not about her reputation is totally irrelevant. The point is that a woman’s sexuality was used to insult a male relative, and everyone seemed to find that outrageous for the wrong reasons. I’d say there’s a fair feminist angle there.

Well, yes – and not totally unreasonably given that it was him who got the phone call.

I would guess that there is no feminist outrage (or at least not much) simply because Baillie is not really that much of a feminist poster girl. I suspect that she would readily agree.

Ross jumped the shark about ten years ago and Brand is just a self-indulgent wannabe. One can only guess whether this incident will be in his next booky wook.

Incidentally, doesn’t Brand write now and then for the Guardian? That might explain why they were rather restrained.

I agree with others that this is really a non-story, but there really is no feminist angle to bolt on.

One point does seem to have been overlooked. I saw in one of the reports that the producer on the show was 25. I don’t know much about the media, but 25 sounds terribly young to be a producer? Or am I wrong on that, I am happy to be corrected.

I’m going to make an ad hominem, aggressive and accusatory comment on your blog one day soon, under one of your posts about religion, citing your ignoring of various bad things that have happened in the world recently. It’s OK because I just need to vent.

+++++++

Anyway, more on this story. So it turns out that Ms Baillie describes in The Sun in explicit detail exactly how she had sex with Brand, hardly the soul of discretion is she. Just doesn’t sound like she really cares about her grandfather’s feelings on the issue. She’s also done some hardcore lesbian spanking porn, which you can all google and see if you feel the need to flesh out your insight on the subject. The whole thing really is a circus. What a farce. David Cameron and Gordon Brown jumping in. What a joke they make of their positions. And finally, The Sun and the Daily Mail, a bigger pair of hypocritical little twats you could never find. What a farcical, hypocritical, hysterical spectacle.

b’shalom

bananabrain

‘The exaggerated laddishness that Ross personifies, and which is ridiculous in a man who is physically fully grown, if not intellectually developed, can be found in parts of all the British classes and particularly in my thirtysomething generation. It will not vanish with a row over the behaviour of a broadcaster and can be seen on Blackpool promenade on a raucous Friday evening, or at the Bullingdon club, as the heirs to Osborne and Rothschild smash up some bar and pay off the proprietor.

Loutishness in the British male is nothing new; to an extent it is in our national DNA and partly explains the nation’s military success. But only in more recent decades has it been celebrated by sources of authority: the nation’s public service broadcaster and a slew of magazines and advertisers. The tenor of most mainstream comedy, and other entertainment, has become abusive and the tone of much of the national conversation is now glib and cynical.’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/10/31/do3101.xml

Never, ever thought I’d be referencing anything from the Telegraph.

b’shalom

bananabrain

The icing on the cake of this entire selfrightous farce was when Emily Maitlis started a line of questioning so pooterish and absurd it could have been an episode of Brass Eye.

Outrage Emily!

The uk case with the grand daughter is complicated. Its harder for people to defend her honour (they should) because they are not accustomed to hitting back and expressing their disgust at outrageous media behaviour. Folks need to reflect on what honour and privacy mean, even in a promiscious big brother fueled age like this one.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing what’s wrong with what Tatchell said here. In fact the man is spot on. If you’re a stripper, in fact part of a troupe that goes under the name the Satanic sluts, being outed as one of Brand’s previous conquests is hardly going to besmirch your good name is it — as Bailie claimed?

Indeed she has greedily capitalised on it herself presumably with a full view of squeezing every last drop of publicity she can get from it, making her a different kind of slut I guess. But getting back to what Tatchell said. At the end of the day, maybe it’s just plain wrong for the public at large to associate stripping under the title “slut” with promiscuity, and of course it may also a serious feminist issue. The public however do tend to make these assumptions unfortunately, and Tatchell was just pointing this out.

Brand should have gone earlier, Ross should be sacked or better still have his contract severely renegotiated. There is nothing wrong with holding our stars in contempt as we might our bankers, when they are responsible for a calamity.

As for Andrew Sachs, he really has been stuffed. By the BBC, by Brand and Ross and by his granddaughter. Reading between the lines it does not look as if Mr Sachs is all that happy with his granddaughter’s choice of ‘career’.

I would despair if she was to benefit from this, whilst claiming to be upset for her grandfather.

On the broader front, its irrelevant that its Andrew Sachs. It would be equally offensive had the calls been to an ordinary household.

Ala, I believe feminism is learning to see the wood for the trees. Well I hope it is.

For what its worth, the catastrophe from a feminist point of view was losing one of the most succesful executives in broadcasting.

“After the show trial they’ll be put on the Sachs Offender’s Register.

I’ll get me coat.”