Richard Digance

Subject: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 04:09 AM

I note that over on Folk against Fascism, a poster has termed Richard Digance a racist.

I am not clear that that is a criticism customarily levelled at Digance.

Is it said of him and why?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: alanabit
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 05:09 AM

Unless Richard Digance has changed changed a great deal since I last saw him, the remark is twaddle, of course. However, it seems common these days to label anyone, whose views on any aspect of race controversy do not photo fit one's own, a racist. It seems to get casually tossed around like other words such as "Nazi", "Fascist" and "bigot". There is a real danger of making these words redundant through careless over use.

Please excuse the thread drift Richard.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,A human being
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 05:30 AM

Richard Digance is not racist, if he is why is he my friend.
Please consider the danger of labelling (libeling) such a lovely bloke.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:15 AM

neither is Joe Stead a racist.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:47 AM

No, it's not BS - it's about a singer (and comedian) and the remark is made elsewhere about his apparent booking for Cropredy this year.

So, assuming for the purposes of this post that the allegation is false, how did it originate and how and why is it being perpetuated?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Silas
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:06 AM

Well, Richard, it is being perpetuated by threads like this...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: alanabit
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:23 AM

I do not think so. The purpose of the thread is to establish the truth (or more likely complete falsehood) of the allegation.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:24 AM

in 1985,as a member of The New Mexborough Concertina quartet,we recorded some material for an lp for Dambuster.
we recorded this material for Richard Digance on the understanding that he would release it as an lp.
without any discussion he sold this recording to Dave Bulmer ,who has subsequently hidden it away.
I was fairly pissed off with Richard Digance,however I have to say in fairness to him,that he never struck me as a racist,I have never heard him utter one racist comment,furthermore on the two occasions I booked him for clubs,Inever once heard him say anything racist.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 08:40 AM

So that's no-one having been aware of such an assertion in the past, is it?

Someone who knows ought to trot over to FaF and set them right then.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 09:57 AM

I see it is a message from some one called Ken [Cropredy Festival],perhaps he has seen more of Richard Digance than I have,but it is libellous to call someone a racist,without having evidence to back it up[perhaps he has].
I would not cross the road to see Richard Digance,I booked him at folk clubs 30 years ago,as he was popular with club members,I do not recall anything that was racist.
somebody used to sing a song about Portugeuse,but I thought that was Derek Brimstone,so is Derek Brimstone racist?
I would be surprised.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: alanabit
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 10:00 AM

"She loved a Portuguese" is a funny song, which actually takes the piss out of the narrator. It would be a little bizarre to label a singer of it as "racist" - although there are people around who like to take offence at lots of things.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 10:22 AM

The FaF comment, whether it be right or wrong

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: goatfell
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 10:26 AM

So was I classed as a rascist, and when I asked that pesron why they never had the guts to answer me. So watch what you are writting, unless you know the person personally don't spread rummours.
I'll proberly get an answer form their 'friend'.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 10:33 AM

Yes, well, I was called a racist by one of the people running the FAF, and I ain't one either. It's why I won't have that page on mine.
I've found a good anti BNP one on Facebook though, thanks to jade, 'jeddy' on here.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rog Peek
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 12:35 PM

I was once accused of being a racist when I sang 'The Bricklayer's Song'!

Rog

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: alanabit
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 12:56 PM

"The culture of offendedness" I think Harvey Andrews called it in a good thread a few years back. There certainly seem to be some folks out there, who like to take offence at things.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 02:13 PM

Mr. Bridge (esq)

In the USA - a thread of this nature

Begun by a lawyer

Could be classified with the disparaging term Ambulance Chaser

Trolling for such information is certainly NOT investigative research....and such pettifoggery might lead to a reprimend before the bar association.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

("solictor" - what a quaintly appropriate UK term for a "profession" - when interpreted in the madern American street application)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 02:28 PM

Seems to me, the allegation about Richard Digance would have been handled better in the thread where the allegation appeared. As Gargoyle says, starting a thread about it simply serves to broadcast the allegation further.
Seems to me that this is a thread about somebody's politics, not about his music. That being the case, why is it in the music section?
And thirdly, using just a person's name to title a thread doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Did he die? Did you attend a concert? Did he have puppies?
That being said, I'm glad you didn't give further credence to the allegations by titling it "Richard Digance is a such-and-such," which would broadcast the allegation all over Google.
Might I be correct in thinking, Richard, that your primary reason for starting this thread is simply to stir the pot?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Big Norman Voice
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 02:31 PM

Richard stir the pot?
Perish the thought!
You'll be telling me next his politics are left wing ;)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 02:42 PM

I started the thread because I wanted to know, and in the old days one could rely on getting information on the Mudcat. Despite many things, this is still an active forum where the enquiry will be seen.

Gargly, you are welcome to refer the thread to the Law Society if you wish. Mazel Tov.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 02:44 PM

PS - Joe - check the FaF thread. It's about the wisdom (or otherwise) of booking RD at a festival. That makes it about a musical topic as well as about a musical performer.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 03:26 PM

For heaven's sake grow up.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 04:44 PM

Yes, we certainly wouldn't want to book someone at a festival if he/she had improper ideas, would we? It wouldn't be British, if it weren't properly censored first.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 05:39 PM

It wouldn't be British, if it weren't properly censored first

Hey man, don't tar us all with the same brush! And he who is without sin cast the first stone...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 05:50 PM

1. Tell Woodie Guthrie what his music was about. I'm quite happy not to have racists or male antiabortionists at festivals.
2. The thread on FaF seems to have disappeared.
3. I saw no evidence there nor here that RD was a racist.
4. Therefore probably the OP there was a troll.
5. Therefore probably in the absence of (and unless anyone has) any evidence to the contrary RD is not a racist.
6. There! Isnt that better out in the open.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Big Norman Voice
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 05:52 PM

Funny how Americans seem to think they have the monopoly on free speech. It may be a part of the constitution, but there's such a thing as abuse of privileges.
You can have too much free speech, and then you end up offending others, in the exercise of your "rights"

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:03 PM

Yeah, but in the UK, it's the progressives who do the censorship...

Is it so horrible to have a male antiabortionist sing a traditional song at a folk festival? Is that the way it is in the UK, that a person has to pass a political litmus test before being allowed to sing a song? With all the pressure I get demanding the silencing of this and that and the other one, it sure seems to be the case.

Labels are a dangerous thing - they're just a prettied-up form of prejudice. Seems to me the underlying question in this thread is whether somebody should be labeled "racist." I think that stinks. I wonder what Richard Digance thinks about having a thread named after himself.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:15 PM

Antiabortionists are simply slavers. They want to dictate what a woman does with her body. You want the KKK on folk platforms in the USA, Joe? Be careful, you'll have David Hannam over with you.

Digance should be happy. In the absence of evidence to the contrary we have concluded that there is no reliable indication that he is a racist. He would not be happy about that?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Martin Duffy
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:22 PM

Is it just me or is there some obsession here at Mudcat with accusing everyone & their dog of being racist?

Would Digance be happy? Probably not, for as we all know mud(cat) sticks!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:34 PM

Richard, I think there'd be a good chance a Ku Klux Klan member would make use of the stage to spew racist propaganda. That's what they do. I don't think the same is the case with your ordinary male antiabortionist, or with the many people who seem to merit the title "racist" in these parts. Yes, if a performer is known to take advantage of the stage as a political platform, then I think it's legitimate to make use of that history in making a booking decision. If the person's political opinions are not part of his performance, then I think a political litmus test is inappropriate.

Judge a performer on his/her performance, not on some label that's been pasted upon him.

The Folk Against Fascism thread, by the way, is alive, well, and as tedious as ever.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 06:54 PM

*sigh*

There isn't half a load of pompous shite talked on Mudcat in pursuit of "free speech".

Firstly, when Richard Bridge referred to a male anti-abortionist, he was referring to a specific British folk singer who wrote an anti-abortion song. So in this case, the political opinions are indeed part of his performance. It has been a source of contention on the British folk scene ever since.

Secondly, the originator of the thread on Facebook sent me a message, telling me that he had walked out of a Richard Digance performance because RD referred to his "good friend" Jim Davidson (for American readers, a comedian who tells a lot of racist jokes) and that RD proceeded to tell some dubious jokes during this performance.

As I have absolutely no way of substantiating this claim (or otherwise), I took the thread down. Even if this happened, I thought it was possible that the reference was tongue-in-cheek, but in the absence of evidence, I decided to take the thread down. It's only because the issue was revived here that I felt compelled to respond and explain.

Thirdly: tellya what, Joe - why not book a member of the Ku Klux Klan at your next festival or shindig. See how well their "improper ideas" go down.


I won't bother to respond to some of the other gratuitous nonsense on this thread (some people will take any opportunity for a pathetic pop) except to say, in the words of my friend Ian Anderson, Life is too bloody short.


As you were.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:43 PM

"Antiabortionists are simply slavers. They want to dictate what a woman does with her body."

Weren't opponents of slavery sometimes criticised on the grounds that they wanted to dictate what slaveowners did with their property?

But I'd suggest that this is not an appropriate thread to carry on an argument about such matters, or about whether Vin Garbutt should be booked in particular festivals because of his views on this issue.
...............................

As for the Facebook accusation about about Richard Digance, I get suspicious about that kind of thing, as possible instances of dirty tricks propaganda. Misdirected or phony accusations of racism can be a way of undermining and discrediting genuine warnings.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:49 PM

Mudcat ,should [imo] be about the sharing of music,the passing on of songs, and the passing on of musical techniques.
The libelling of performers as racist,when there is no evidence to substantiate it is[imo] not appropriate.
Ruth,you have [imo]done the correct thing in removing that post,from folk against fascism facebook,it reflects badly upon FAF.
I do not like to see other performers libelled [ as I explained earlier Richard Digance is not a friend of mine],but I can imagine how I would feel if I was in his position.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 07:52 PM

Very Good point, Mcgrath,
I also think Digance is owed an apology.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 08:01 PM

Sorry, Ruth, but the credibility of your folkie compatriots is questionable. I hear such a steady stream of huffy self-righteousness coming from your side of the pond, that it's hard to take any of it seriously. It's clear to me that the compulsion to label and suppress is an integral part of British liberalism, while it is the very antithesis of American liberal thinking.

Labels without facts - are just plain prejudice.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 08:05 PM

"As for the Facebook accusation about about Richard Digance, I get suspicious about that kind of thing, as possible instances of dirty tricks propaganda. Misdirected or phony accusations of racism can be a way of undermining and discrediting genuine warnings."

Usually when something suspicious appears on the FAF page, I have a look at the originator - you can usually tell when it's our resident troll (but hey - he's just practicing free speech, right? Cloning Mudcat members' identities to defame them - just a bit of fun, isn't it? Lighten up! Live and let live!)

The person who started the Richard Digance thread wasn't an obvious BNP disruptor - and it's possible that he is completely sincere, and simply misinterpreted what RD said on that particular occasion. Until we have more evidence either way, it isn't really worth speculating.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 08:19 PM

"Sorry, Ruth, but the credibility of your folkie compatriots is questionable. I hear such a steady stream of huffy self-righteousness coming from your side of the pond, that it's hard to take any of it seriously. It's clear to me that the compulsion to label and suppress is an integral part of British liberalism, while it is the very antithesis of American liberal thinking."

Oh please. I grew up in America - the culture that virutally invented self-righteous sanctimony. It may be hard for you to take any of it seriously, but that's your luxury and your choice. The UK, on the other hand, has just elected two nasty pieces of Nazi filth to represent it in Europe. Why? Because not enough people stood up to the BNP's lies and spin. Because not enough people felt angry enough, or empowered enough, to speak out against them. Because not enough people took this threat seriously. Because not enough people are willing to stand up to the "soft racism" on their doorstep, so it becomes normalised, the thin end of the wedge. Bleating about free speech when confronting racism is a cop-out.

The British Nazis have been on a campaign of spin which has sought to gain them a place in legitemate politics in this country. This is a party that aligns itself with the KKK in America. If you choose to give them a platform (and you have) because of your wooly American liberalism, that's a choice you have to live with. Good luck to you, and in sleeping at night. It's certainly easier (and safer) to shrug and turn your back in the name of "free speech" than it is to stand up and fight them.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 08:25 PM

Woody Guthrie had "This machine kills Fascists" on his guitar. But then he wasn't exactly a "liberal". (And of course the words have more than one meaning.)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Jul 09 - 10:43 PM

So, Ruth, step away from your dramatic hystrionics for a moment and tell us how many seats the UK has as a whole, if it's such a horrible thing that two BNP candidates were elected. If my count is correct, your BNP 'Nazi filth' have two seats out of 72.

Oh, and let's take another look at what Richard Bridge says about Vin Garbutt, who wrote a song called "Little Innocents" back in 1983, that simply dared to question the morality of abortion:

Antiabortionists are simply slavers. They want to dictate what a woman does with her body.

Oh, please!! Do you care to get yet more dramatic in your defense of your calls for suppression? You people are going to choke on your ideology if you don't open your minds a bit, and learn something about tolerance.


-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:51 AM

Joe, are you suggesting that supporting the 'rights' of fascist organisations to speak freely is more important than supporting the rights of their victims and intended victims to live freely? You say we should get a sense of proportion because we 'only' have two fascist MEPs. So how many is too many? 10? 20? 30? By then, I fear, it would be too late to effectively stop them from doing serious damage.

Fascism - in whatever form it finds it convenient to take - needs to be exposed and absolutely marginalised before it gets enough of a hold to do genuine damage.

For the record, people having pops at the likes of Richard Digance on probably spurious grounds has nothing to do with fighting fascism. The bringing of Vin Garbutt into the argument is utterly irrelevant - its an entirely different issue. And no-one's censoring him anyway. I also think its a bloody shame that the Folk Against Fascism thread, which could have been a useful information thread about the activities of the far right in trying to infiltrate the folk scene, turned into a tedious exchange between a handful of people. Typical bloody Mudcat, I thought. But - hey - that's free speech isn't it?

Finally, if you want to see how a proportion of the UK population chooses to excercise its free speech, try the spEak You're bRanes website. It makes Mudcat look almost sensible.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Silas
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:55 AM

Joe - you must remember that Hitler started with just one seat...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:56 AM

"Labels are a dangerous thing - they're just a prettied-up form of prejudice"

Bingo! Thanks for having the courage to say it Joe.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Spleen Cringe
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:07 AM

Kinda know what you're saying BWM, but equally, you wouldn't simply dismiss 'fascist' as a label when applied to the BNP, would you? Labels are sometimes simply things we attach to other things to make it clear what's actually in the tin. Erm, innit?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:12 AM

"Hitler started with just one seat..."
And one ball - according to rumour.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: melodeonboy
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:15 AM

"Joe - you must remember that Hitler started with just one seat..."

Hitler, he only had one seat
The other was where he'd put his feet
Himmler did something similar
And poor old Goebells had no stools at all

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Dave Earl
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:24 AM

"Oh, please!! Do you care to get yet more dramatic in your defense of your calls for suppression? You people are going to choke on your ideology if you don't open your minds a bit, and learn something about tolerance."


So you tolerate Organisations like KKK do you?



Dave

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:45 AM

"Joe, are you suggesting that supporting the 'rights' of fascist organisations to speak freely is more important than supporting the rights of their victims and intended victims to live freely? You say we should get a sense of proportion because we 'only' have two fascist MEPs. So how many is too many? 10? 20? 30? By then, I fear, it would be too late to effectively stop them from doing serious damage"

Excactly, Spleen - that's rather the point of trying to do something about all of this now.

Regarding FAF: well, god knows the English folk scene is fragile and vulnerable enough at the moment, without the bloody Nazis as well. The BNP have published documents which encourage their activists to infiltrate folk activity. Nick Griffin has cited Kate Rusby as one of his favourite singers, and has turned up at several traditional events in the past couple of years. The BNP are selling my friends' music on their website, and the artists concerned are powerless to do anything about it. Does this sound like histrionics? In a nice, cosy American liberal way, should we just pretend it's not happening in the name of free speech and tolerance and put our fingers in our ears and go "la la la"? Or should we take a stand now, before it goes any further?

"For the record, people having pops at the likes of Richard Digance on probably spurious grounds has nothing to do with fighting fascism. The bringing of Vin Garbutt into the argument is utterly irrelevant - its an entirely different issue. And no-one's censoring him anyway."

Indeedio. Which is why I took the thread down. Personally, Vin Garbutt's political views would not prevent me from booking him: one person's opinion on a controversial subject is just as valid as mine, and he has every right to express it. I would book Roy Bailey or Billy Bragg, so quite clearly I've no right to NOT book someone just because they express views I don't necessarily agree with.

This is quite different to giving a platform to right-wing extremists. Defending the rights of people who, as Spleen has said, are organised specifically to deny the freedoms and rights of others is a whole different ballgame. You may not take the threat from the BNP seriously, but the fact that they've won these two seats shows that their very carefully orchestrated campaign to infiltrate mainstream politics is working. And it's not just about the fact that two seats have gone: have a look at who is occupying them. Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons. Tell me, if someone who denied the holocaust and had once advocated the bombing of synagogues got elected to represent a constituency in your area, what would you do?

A few years ago they would have been unelectable. Now they represent us. Whether they are 1 or 100, this sickens me. But do tell me, Joe - is it histrionics to be worried that their election further legitimises their politics, and strengthens their cause? At what point ought we to start taking action?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:55 AM

"If the person's political opinions are not part of his performance, then I think a political litmus test is inappropriate.

Judge a performer on his/her performance, not on some label that's been pasted upon him."

Just as a by-the-way, Joe, I though I'd mention the fact that one of my favourite folk singers ever is Peter Bellamy. His political leanings were very far from my own, but it didn't stop him from being one of the finest interpreters of traditional song that Britain has ever produced.

How's the view from up there on that high horse, by the way?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:58 AM

Spleen Cringe:
Finally, if you want to see how a proportion of the UK population chooses to excercise its free speech, try the spEak You're bRanes website. It makes Mudcat look almost sensible.

Thanks for that link, SC - I've just laughed myself silly reading some of it! What with that and Charlie Brooker, there's hope for us yet.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:05 AM

"Defending the rights of people who, as Spleen has said, are organised specifically to deny the freedoms and rights of others is a whole different ballgame."

Isn't it just.


"How's the view from up there on that high horse, by the way?"

Only those who sit on high horses would ever know, I'd guess

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:07 AM

Bleating about free speech when confronting racism is a cop-out

Yes it is, as is regarding those who treat ant-feminism, homophobia, discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, creed or physical/mental divergance, indeed anyone who's a bit different as suitable fodder for so-called "comedy" that turns to hatred

The nazi filth have gained but two seats in the European parliament, so Joe Offer thinks that's not worth worrying about. Wrong. Not only does it afford them a veneer of respectability (not to mention funding) but it needs to be seen in the light of many more councillors at lower echelons of local government scattered throughout the land (could easily have included one individual who used to post here), preying insidiously on the disaffected poor, scared for their jobs, their housing, their health service and education provision.

As someone remarked elsewhere. Hitler started off with only one seat. How an American can blandly turn a benign, blind eye to low-level populist fascism trading on ignorance defeats me. America truly is, as Ruth says, the culture that virtually invented self-righteous sanctimony. Even in golden California, your governor isn't exactly a beacon of free thought and progressive thinking. But what does one resident who's "in charge" around here do? He relegates what was by far the most important thread ever begun here, Folk Against Fascism, into the basement merely because of the irrelevant ramblings of a tiny group of benighted nutters.

As for the actual topic of this thread, I reviewed Richard Digance's first recording Pisces with the remark that they may have had their chips. I've no idea of the veracity of what he's alleged to have said onstage recently as I've never seen him since. But if any performer comes out with that sort of drivel it would indicate that the fish had begun to stink rather badly.

Footnote: Absolutely none of this applies to Peter Bellamy who, (apart from being one the finest interpreters of English (and indeed American) song ever) and although not exactly an SWP adherent, was one of the most open-minded, intelligent and interesting freethinkers I ever had the honour of debating with.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:09 AM

"How's the view from up there on that high horse, by the way?"
For all thos apologists who support the 'rights of Fascists. - probably a bit better than from the gutter Lizzie.
From The Irish Times this morning.

"BNP says sink migrant boats
LONDON - British National Party leader Nick Griffin said boats carrying migrants from Africa to Europe should be sunk to stop Europe being "swamped by the Third World".
Mr Griffin, one of two members of the far-right party elected to the European Parliament last month, said occupants of sunk boats could be given life rafts to get back to Africa.-(PA)"

Now let's hear it for the far right - hip-hip........
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:28 AM

"as is regarding those who treat ant-feminism"

Not for this ant, she loves her station in life. :0) a>

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 06:26 AM

For someone who is supposed to be an impartial referee on Mudcat, you seem to me to be expressing a partiality for your own views taking precedence over those of your posters Joe.
Mind you, for a website that professes an 'anything goes apart from personal attacks', policy, there seems to be an awful lot of personal likes and dislikes involved, in what views one can, and cannot, express.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 07:21 AM

the issue here is:calling someone racist when no back up evidence has been provided.
I support Folk against Fascism.
I do not support unsubstantiated allegations against fellow professional musicians.Dick Miles

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 07:47 AM

I'm not a professional musician, just a very-infrequently-booked semi, but I fully support Dick's post above - all of it.
Hence my previous post.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:05 AM

Yup, I'm with Dick on this as well..absolutely. The word 'racist' is flung around way too easily by some who so often have other agendas.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST, Richard Bridge elsewhere
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:14 AM

It seems to me that several issues are becoming entangled.

1. Is RD a racist? So far probably not, although perhaps unwise in choice of words on one occasion (and who among us can say we do better than that?)
2. Accordingly the OP on the thread on Facebook was probably a shit-stirrer, maybe even one from the BNP hoping to handicap FaF.
3. If he is, so what? This is difficult. I would certainly not knowingly suport the use of a folk festival as a platform (even indirect, if for example the loathsome Griffin might be able to say, if David Hannam played Cropredy, "Our members support traditional British music and play at traditional folk festivals") for the BNP. However, if we blacklist people merely because they are members of a political party, are we not as bad as Senator McCarthy was? - Incidentally I put my words badly in this area, previously. But where to draw the line? I would want an undertaking not to sing anti-abortion songs, and while I find some of Bellamy's choices from Kipling tastless in the modern world, I think they fall on the right side of the line. Organisers - it becomes harder. What if Nick Griffin was an able interpreter of traditional folk song? I would bar him because his singing would not be separable from his propaganda.
4. Joe. I think Joe has as much right to post here as anyone else, so long as it is clear that he does so with his personal hat on and not his mod's hat on. I think he is overdoing the right to shout "fire", but I would support his liberty to say what he has.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:45 AM

I hate this sort of accusation.

Some years back, when I was IT training manager for a company darn sarf, I had to bring in a third party trainer to do a 2 day course at a company in Croyden, coupled with quite a number of days at the same company.

This trainer had excellent references and had been used by us on numerous occasions.

Anyway, I received the evaluations of the course and one evaluation was severely critical of his behaviour to the women in the course. So much so, I had to suspend him, until I had investigated the issues.

This guy was in danger of losing his job with the 3rd party company as well as losing any work with us.

I went to the company and interviewed all the people who were in the course and talked with the personnel director.

The conclusion was that this lady was little bit older than the others and took offence at the guys popularity with the other women.

It was deemed that he had done nothing wrong and we re-instated him and he carried on training at that company.

The poor guy was so distraught about it all as he didn't understand what he had done wrong.

We eventually got an apology from the lady in question.

Just a thought

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:54 AM

Yup.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 09:08 AM

interesting Richard .
you would only be able to bar him if you were running your club in a seperate room,everybody is free to walk in to a pub,if there was a sing along in the bar,you could do nothing about it,without the landlords permission.
so if MBS George,walked into the middle bar at Sidmouth,you could not prevent her from entering the pub,all that you could do is walk out,or try to talk to her to change her views.
MBS George was acandidate for the BNP,Richard Digance was not,for FAF to be successful it needs to aim its fire correctly,not just scatter shot randomly.,and it needs to control posts.
Joan Crump was correct to remove the unsubstantiated allegation on face book,I think Richard Digance is owed an apology.
Joan Crump mentions her friendship with Ian Anderson,I dont understand the relevance of this,does it mean that Richard Digance wont get an apology? what does it mean?why mention it, life is too short is a phrase used by thousands,and was not invented by the editor of Folk Roots.
talkabout tilting at Windmills and scattering Red Herrings.
Don Quixote where art thou?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:23 AM

Why does RD need any sort of apology (except from the OP over on FaF)?

It seems perhaps a good job that I brought the issue up here, since we seem to be tending to the view that the OP there was wrong.

As to the rest of your post, I don't see your point.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:36 AM

well Richard ,you are a lawyer,he has been libelled by the op,and its possible[you would know the legal situation better than me] that the controllers of the site,could be deemed to have been negligent in not removing it earlier.
certainly the op should apologise,did I suggest anyone else should,no I did not.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 10:48 AM

Put your arses away people. No-one on this thread has called Richard Digance a racist or has said that it's ok to call someone a racist when its unsubstantiated.

Villan, as a manager myself, I say you did the right thing. Suspension is NOT a punishment and that was presumably made clear to the guy concerned (not that it's a pleasant experience having been on the recieving end of a suspension in the past. too!). Credit to you that you investigated it thoroughly, got to the bottom of it and ensured a just solution prevailed.

Now what did this have to so with the thread again?

Anyway, the key point is that Ruth Archer did the right thing bay taking down the thread with the possibly malicious accusation from the Folk Against Facism Facebook page. Surely that's the end of the story, isn't it? I don't think anyone is suggesting we convene some sort of Mudkangaroo court, are they?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 12:23 PM

I've been puzzling all afternoon over whatever Villan's tedious work-related spat had to do with performers who include inappropriate material onstage. IF Richard Digance (or anyone) lapses into Jim Davidson-style, offensive racist claptrap, it obviously needs looking at. That Vin Garbutt has performed publicly provocative songs that offended - indeed distressed - many women is beyond doubt. The sentiments are his views to which he is unfortunately entitled but neither he nor any man has the right to dictate to women on that subject. I'd gladly watch a set of environmental songs and whistle tunes from him because he's good but enslaving, reactionary propaganda like Innocents should be reserved for gigs at the Society For The Production Of Unwanted Children (or whatever they're calling themselves nowadays).

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 12:38 PM

"The sentiments are his views to which he is unfortunately entitled but neither he nor any man has the right to dictate to women on that subject."

Could I just put a word in for the men here.

When it's a personal thing for men, that is, *their* baby too, I think they do have a right to an opinion, actually. Ultimately, the woman is the one who decides, but to say that men have no right to an opinion whatsoever on this subject is crap.

No-one has the right to 'dictate' to men what they can and can't have opinions about, and as a woman, I can say that, on their behalf, whereas they'd get their heads bitten off for it.

We are one species, not two different ones, and ALL of us have a right to our opinions, in my view, at least.

And hey, spare a thought for some men who actually have to stand by, perhaps desperate to have a child, and watch whilst that is taken away from them.

There are so often two sides to abortion...three actually, because of course, there is also the 'innocent soul' as well.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 12:50 PM

Predictable lack of perception and airheaded inability to comprehend, as usual. What I said is that a festival mainstage is not the place to expound complex ideas which have such profound personal and political implications.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:05 PM

Play nicely, persons of gender!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Howard Jones
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:14 PM

"What I said is that a festival mainstage is not the place to expound complex ideas which have such profound personal and political implications."

Why not? There are plenty of performers who make their politics an integral part of their performance - not just their songs but their patter too. Singers like Pete Seeger, Dick Gaughan, Roy Bailey and Leon Rosselson come to mind. Are you saying they shouldn't express their political opinions, or is it just those whose opinions you disagree with?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:34 PM

Of course not. I was referring specifically to those opinions under discussion in this thread which inflict distress on people who are thus discriminated against, namely ethnic minorities in the case of racism and women being oppressed by reason of of their sexuality. I am saying that it is inappropriate for any performer holding such views to inflict them on a festival audience. None of the work of Pete Seeger, Dick Gaughan, Roy Bailey nor Leon Rosselson is in this category, or anything like it.

(Is this National Fatuousness Day?)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:41 PM

>>but neither he nor any man has the right to dictate to women on that subject<<

I agree entirely with you Dianne even though you are constantly putting men down.

I have a lovely wife and 2 lovely daughters and support their rights implicitally and stand up for them when required, beleive me.

My wife had an abortion for personal reasons and I supported her, but she made the decision. I took her to the clinic and told this religious women by the entrance to get a job with sex and travel, when she tried to stop my wife going in as she was sinning and all that crap. I supported her afterwards and we got through it.

I have also put Vin Garbutt on at Faldingworth Live. Why would I not. Just becuase he has strong religious opinions about abortion. If he were to say anything to me, I would probably tell him to get a job with sex and travel as well, but that wouldn't stop me booking him.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:45 PM

The Thought Police are watching you..................

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:47 PM

If someone misunderstands your post, then I suggest you didn't express yourself clearly enough.
It is also not safe to assume that a post is a response to your post, unless it quotes your post.

BTW Lizzie
One of us must be maturing, that's twice this month I've agreed with you.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:48 PM

Be fair, Borchester Echo, Howard Jones is not being fatuous. While I personally agree overall with the political views of Seeger, Gaughan, Bailey and Rosselson, I happen to know other people who feel distressed when hearing such views, and even discriminated against. I may not agree with such people, I may even think that they are silly or oversensitive, but hey, we cannot legislate for people's feelings. In this, Joe Offer is right - it has to be the same sauce for goose and gander, otherwise it can appear as partial censorship driven by personal likes and dislikes.

This (i.e. whether a performer's politics matter if he/she does not preach them, from the stage; and whether it is OK or not to use the stage to expound political messages) is a minefield, and I for one cannot see where a line can be drawn authoritatively and impartially. I know where I would like to draw the line, but I can also see that my arguments for doing so would be mainly driven by my personal opinion.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:54 PM

Jesus Christ.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 01:56 PM

Discrimination on the grounds of race and gender is not a matter of "personal opinion". It is illegal and has been for the past 30 odd years. Altering the lack of perception of backwoods neanderthals does, sadly, take longer.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:22 PM

>>Jesus Christ. <<
Do you mean George?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:24 PM

Oh and Dianne >>backwoods neanderthals <<

What bloody century are you living in?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:24 PM

Discrimination on grounds of gender or race is indeed illegal, and rightly so; but as long as the law is too toothless to outlaw the BNP for espousing race discrimination (which surely they clearly do) we are stuck with it unfortunately. We are then left firing at the minnows, the Ken Whatshisnames (who made that comment on Facebook) of this world, while letting the big white elephant charge about the room.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:31 PM

I still stand by my 01:48 PM post. I do know such people and the fact that I disagree with them does not mean that I feel free to ignore their rights. If there is to be a line between what is OK to do and what is not, then the line has to be drawn based on generic arguments so as to have absolutely undisputed validity. And it has to be tested against extreme conditions to see if it passes.

OK, of course in the real world things are imperfect, and we pass laws as best we can, and then try to implement them as best we can. But let's not kid ourselves that they represent "absolute truth".

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:34 PM

Isn't "Backwoods" a term referring to a place where err 'ill educated peoples' might happen to reside, rather than any specific individual on this forum, who may have chosen to adopt this particular term as an ID.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:38 PM

No, it wasn't "George" he was Brian, and he wasn't the son of God he was just a vey naughty boy.

Neanderthals have been extinct for some time now, but modern research indicates that the shape of their breathing passages might have made them excellent singers.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:40 PM

But we have veered off the main point which was the unsubstantiated (and I believe, totally wrong) allegation against RD. Ken Whatshisface's statement was potentially libellous, and Ruth Archer was right to eliminate the related thread.

I believe these points are undisputed by anyone who has posted here. Not much more to say.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:46 PM

Cheers George, easy to forget the stated purpose of this thread.
As you say, the allegations were basically determined to be unfounded. I'll ensure I refrain from posting to this thread from here on.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 02:47 PM

Crow Sister, that is indeed how I took the "backwoods neanderthals" reference - i.e. referring to those people I mentioned who are (mistakenly in my view) offended and distressed by the songs and politics of Seeger, Bailey, Rosselson etc. I never thought it was meant personally at me or anyone else.

But "backwoods neandethals" have rights too; and if the reference was meant to imply that lack of education, or perception, or even common sense, somehow denudes such "neanderthals" of their rights and makes it OK to screw them, then I would disagree vehemently with such a view (which I would consider dangerously elitist).

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:30 PM

Why does RD need any sort of apology (except from the OP over on FaF)?

That's when I know it's not worth staying in the argument - when people start using abbreviations I don't understand....

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 03:43 PM

richard digance ,original poster,folk against fascism, face book.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:03 PM

Yeah, I know, Dick - but still, the abbreviations do make me wonder why the English can't speak English.

But as for this need to label and suppress, I just can't agree. Why can't we give people an opportunity to speak, and then refute what they have to say? Isn't that more effective than silencing them, or smothering them with shouts of "asshole"? Why are we so afraid of differing opinions, that we feel called to silence them instead of answering them?

I certainly agree that the BNP is dangerous and that their election to two seats in the EU is distressing, but I find it far more helpful to hear rational facts and logical opinions about them and what they've done. All the shouting, just sounds like...shouting. When both sides of an argument resort to shouting and name-calling, then both sides sound alike.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:09 PM

El Greko's so annoyingly reasonable, isn't he? I much prefer the Robb Johnson brand of reasonableness: demand the impossible now.
So it's elitist to expect neanderthals to come up to speed with the world as it ought to be and practise respect towards all its citizens? Well, long live elitism.

Joe Offer: what more do you need to listen to or read from the collected litany of the fallout from fascism?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:11 PM

That's a bloody arrogant remark Joe!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:15 PM

Erm.... but why was Richard Digance called a racist, and why are people who don't approve of abortion called sexiata even if they are women? Lots of heat,, very little light.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Morris-ey
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:19 PM

I don't recall Vin being convicted of any offence. He writes and sings songs.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 04:56 PM

In a democracy, freedom of speech is paramount, isn't it, whether you like it or not. Anything else is surely a dictatorship of some form or another.

Joe's right in this one, in my view.

You may hate what the BNP stands for, you may loathe them with every inch of your soul, but they too have freedom of speech, even if they use and abuse theirs to conjure up hatred, as do some in here.

Besides, it's far better to have the BNP out in the open, on Youtube, hearing what they have to say, isn't it? I'd rather be able to see and hear Nick Griffin in the open, than never know who he was, never know who was behind the BNP, or who any of them are.

I truly don't think the British people are going to overwhelmingly vote for the BNP in their millions. A small fraction has done, yes, but that does not mean the entire country is going to and it's highly insulting to suggest that is what's going to happen. Geez, we are one of the most tolerant countries in the world, and it would be good if we remembered that.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:03 PM

Joe Offer: what more do you need to listen to or read from the collected litany of the fallout from fascism?

Yeah, that's kinda what I had in mind. You know, a rational discussion, based on factual information. Cool down on the hysteria, and smack 'em down with logic.
I get the impression that the BMP, like all tyrants, feed on hysteria. Why feed 'em?

If I suppress a person's right to speak, I make a martyr of him. If I let him speak, I allow him the opportunity to make a fool of himself.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:05 PM

MBS George ,the BNP candidate for chippenham and mudcat member knows this,that is why she dare not engage in discussion,because the BNP is intellectually bankrupt,and she knows that the BNP will be made to look Stupid.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:10 PM

Well, Dick, I have to say that I don't think MBSGeorge has been given a fair chance to speak.

And in fairness, I have to agree that "free speech" ain't all what it's cracked up to be in the US, either - even among liberals. The US "political correctness" movement, with its constantly-changing list of unacceptable speech, can be a real damper on free discussion. Why can't people argue with my ideas, and not with the words I choose to express them? For example: I can't talk about disabled people because I can't keep up with the list of appropriate terminology - is "disabled" a bad word nowadays? I can't say "[whatever]-challenged" without gagging. That probably means that I am "euphemism-challenged," and I should be compensated somehow for my disability.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: glueman
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 05:18 PM

Richard Digance is someone who occupied the TV in my formative years for no obvious reason, along with chaps like Richard Stilgoe and James Burke. Apart from that I have nothing against the chap. Just thought I'd share.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: TheSnail
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:07 PM

Joe Offer

make me wonder why the English can't speak English.

Hah! Why should we be lectured on how to speak our own language by some ^&*$£@* colonial who can't even spell arsehole properly?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 09 - 08:24 PM

I can spell it either way....I just don't.

love,

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 01:09 AM

If this thread gets any more personal there'll be trouser-dropping. Not toosure I want to get into that...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 03:17 AM

I suggest that anyone who takes offence at Pete Seeger does it on purpose.

Dave H

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: glueman
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 03:41 AM

As an Englishman I'd have to admit American literature has pissed all over English literature for the past 80 years. On that basis the yanks can spell arse how they like.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 05:00 AM

Oooh! Literature with a capital "L". How very "folk".

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 05:01 AM

PS:

Terry Pratchett

JK Rowling

Or are their capital "L"s not large enough for you?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: greensue
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 05:07 AM

Joe, I think that the term disabled has been replaced with enabled. As an enabled person I can't keep up either. I tell people to look for the cripple in the corner at our pub if they need to find me. As a dictionary definition of a cripple I don't see why I can't say it, but some people are horrified. If something isn't said in a mean manner or with nasty intent surely it should be O.K.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: glueman
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 06:20 AM

Let's hope Bridge's list has been injected with irony, lathered in it and been deep frozen in a 50/50 irony-satire suspension, or the language of Shakespeare is in deep plop.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 06:27 AM

Get a thread you two.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 09:07 AM

This thread is drifting so far it's liable to be lost at sea. Or trapped in the legendary maelstrom of "What is Folk?"...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 10:13 AM

what is folk,is like getting lost in the Bermuda triangle,ORfalling into a Black hole.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 11 Jul 09 - 11:50 AM

Try saying this 100 times very quickly without making a mistake.


Richard Digance in the Readers Digest



Bet you can't

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 04:35 AM

For seven years I lived on the route of the Notting Hill Carnival and around the time of August Bank Holiday at least I regarded my Afro-Caribbean neighbours as inconsiderate shits and usually escaped to Towersey instead.

So who thinks I am thus rendered racist? There's bound to be one . . .

On Mudcat I have ofttimes challenged the appallingly retro attitudes of certain men (and a few female hangers on) who treat music venues as places for picking up women who are apparently complicit in being treated as chattels.

Someone on this very thread translates this as evidence that I am "constantly putting men down". Not so. Just as I didn't hang around to endure and then whinge about the noise and filth generated at Maas in da Grove and blame it on a specific slice of the community, I have as little as possible to do with such ignorance, wilful or not, displayed by the benighted of whatever gender.

Folk Against Fascism has the potential to combat both.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 05:17 AM

>>On Mudcat I have ofttimes challenged the appallingly retro attitudes of certain men (and a few female hangers on) who treat music venues as places for picking up women who are apparently complicit in being treated as chattels.<<

Just trying to get my head around this.

I can't think of any folk club or folk concert venue where that happens. Maybe I go to the wrong places or I have led a sheltered life (NOT).

However, many friendships are made at such places. This may or may not lead to 2 people going out with each other.

If they are a single man or woman or indeed married, then I see nothing wrong in making friendships.

If they are married - its really up to them, if they decide they want to go off the rails.

Since I have been with my wife, I have remained faithful to her. I go to folk clubs on my own, to listen to the music, make banter and enjoy it with friends.

When I was single, I would go to discos, nightclubs, pubs etc etc, and yes, if you saw somebody you liked, you tried to tried to chat them up (it was the responsibilty of the man in those days) and sometimes that would lead to a romance, one night stand, frienship or nothing. I thought that was quite normal in life.
Nowadays, women are more forward and indeed make the first move.

It takes 2 to tango.

All I know Dianne, you have been very rude to a number of very respectable men, who you know nothing about, but becuase they make a comment on a thread, that is not to your taste, you have branded them perverts or something like that.

What the hell is wrong with you. Explain yourself?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 05:32 AM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ (to cite another Ian Anderson expression).

In bringing together two themes of this thread: racism and sexism intrinsincally linked in fascism and the potential role of FAF in opposing and overcoming them, I have awakened two gibbering upholders of an outdated status quo of inequality from the flatlands.

Well, well, could this be an example of Joe's "freedom of speech" policy exposing the bankruptcy of such depths of lack of intellect for what it is?

Bring on John Stuart Mill and Tom Paine. You're needed more than ever.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 05:52 AM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ

This is one acronym that's not worth learning. The expansion is far easier
to remember.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 07:56 AM

Actually, there are quite a few fRoots acronyms not worth learning. Why? Because they're all condescending put downs, used by folks who think they're intellectually superior to everyone else.

They ain't.

So, a man comes over to a woman and starts talking to her, and for that he's labelled some kind of chauvenist?

Sorry, Diane, but for way too long 'the women' have had it their way and their way alone.

If men treated women in the way that some women now treat men, there'd be all hell to pay.

It seems to me that the dreaded Feminism has turned our women into the worst kind of chauvenistic men, ones who feel that men don't really have a right to an opinion, are the butt of all crude jokes, are basically thick and neanderthal, and who can be approached and talked to in a very derogatory way, because.....that's what women now do.

Well fook that for a game of feminists!

It stinks.

And you know something, it does my heart good to hear the 60s feminists nowadays bleating 'but it wasn't supposed to be like this!"...because THEY are the ones who ensured it became this way. They turned men into objects of hate, branding ALL men chavenists and selfish, when of course, that was never true. They encouraged women to become anti-feminine, abandon their children in preference of their careers, because hell, a job is soooooo much more important than a child to the new breed of Intellectual Women who want to have it all....

But they forgot about the children...probably because they were so wrapped up in themselves and their 'mission' that they really didn't give a flying duck about babies and children anyway. Hell they're just irritating little brats that interfere in your life, and anyway, it's far better they're brought up by the State, so they can be taken away from the dreaded Family Unit.

Well, the results of the Selfish Philosophy are now out there on the streets of every city centre, The Lost Children, drinking themselves to death, lost in a world that has no time for them.

Fathers who are pushed aside, not needed, not wanted. The Law heavily weighed against them. Of course, the women take everything from them in divorce, especially the money, because the law ensures that the man suffers most, sometimes beyond any form of reason, but hell, it's OK, because it's happening to the men, and who the hell cares about them....It's the women who matter!

Fook that too.

It's all be weighted so unfairly against men for so long..and the women who've pushed for it to happen this way are NO better than the worst form of mysoginists who made some women's lives so utterly miserable. The Feminist movement should have the guts to stand up and say that they got many things wrong...and this hatred of men, by some, is one of those things, as is the abandonment of our children, as a nation, and the lack of respect now shown to anyone who wants to be a full time mother.

Well, motherhood is actually one of the hardest, most rewarding and most important jobs in the world, because we are raising the next generation, and once upon a time, in the days before women were brainwashed into trying to have it all and be better than men, it was the women who held society together, raising the children, creating the neighbourhoods, and safe ones at that, looking after the nation's workforce...a full time, bloody hard job in itself..

Are we better off, as a nation, as a world, now that no-one is really in charge of our children any more? No, imo.

Are we better off with empty houses, neighhourhoods devoid of people from dawn to dusk? No, imo.

Are we better off with the divorce rate rocketing as women find they can't cope with full time work AND trying to be a mother as well? No, imo.

We have created the most stressful of societies all round, where ALL are suffering, the men, the women and the children...in the name of what?

Feminism should have always been called Equality, because it was never a War, a war of Them & US....It was never about seeing men as the enemy, but getting each side to SEE each other, recognise each other's strengths and weaknesses, share the load of life a little more, be kind to one another...and first and foremost realise that the children matter more than mothers or fathers, because they are the future.....our future.

And now, back to the Male Mudslinging...but please note that NO man is talking about women in the way in which YOU are talking about men.

Thank you.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 08:00 AM

Yeah, yeah...

chauvinist
misogynist

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Acorn4
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 08:22 AM

The only bit of evidence which seems to have been quoted against RD so far is a "friendship" with Jim Davidson. If that is a friendship rather than an acquaintance the it might perhaps be rather worrying.

Like many others I do find this "comedian's" smart-arse cockney whizz-kid humour extremely unfunny.

There again, I suppose you can be friends with someone without necessarily sharing their views.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: bubblyrat
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 08:49 AM

Why not ask someone from "Folk FOR Fascism " ??---There must be such an organisation,surely,if only to counter the attempts at World Domination by its antithesis ??
            If anyone thinks that Richard Digance is a racist,or whatever,then my advice is not to book him,listen to him,or buy his records / CDs.Otherwise, it is really none of your business----is it ??

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 09:19 AM

Steady on, people!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: foggers
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 09:50 AM

Lizzie - I am fascinated that you think feminism could even be considered to have been so influential that all the ills of modern western society can be laid at its doorstep.

There are as many different "feminisms" as there are women who have thought about the politics and power relationships regarding gender, all around the globe. I still regard myself as a feminist and proud to be. I do not hate men - I hate social enequalities that mean that some groups in some societies are impoverished, persecuted, die younger and have no or little access to health, education, sanitation or basic civil rights. I believe in HUMAN rights, not just rights for women at the expense of children and men.

The kind of feminism you seem to be ranting about is one VERY narrow western white version that sprang from the likes of Betty Friedan's writing, that did indeed lobby for the chance to get away from being housewives and to have choices about education, career, contraception etc. It is mainly white, middle class women who were in that position in the 50s and 60s. Working class women (both white and women of colour) the world over have usually had to combine child rearing with enconomic activity, since time immemorial.

As for the original topic of this thread; I will be playing support to RD later in the year, so I await the experience with open minded curiosity now..........

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 10:11 AM

This thread is concerned with unacceptable and inappropriate attitudes and utterances in public performance and, indeed, whether to censor or regulate.

What it is NOT about is hysterical ravings from unreconstructed, middle-England nutters culled from Derry Street press releases whose aim (insofar as they appear to have one) is to restore "Merrie England" to pre-1950s "not many foreigners (just enough to empty the bins and drive the buses)" with women relegated to pre-war subjugation and Kinder, Küche, Kirche.

We can conclude, I think, that both this backwoodsperson and madlizziecornish (who, I am mightily relieved to confirm, I have never clapped eyes on) are reincarnations of Mary Whitehouse and well in the "oppress 'em and stamp on 'em" camp. And I think we can all do without their mindless, pointless yelling and spouting of entirely unsubstantiated, off-topic bollocks from close who have, clearly, no conception of the precise meaning of feminism, nor indeed, racism.

I have been talking about:

(a) the allegation (certainly as yet unproven and probably untrue) that a particular artist's material now includes Jim Davidson stylee claptrap and perhaps should not be booked at Cropredy, though I do, however, feel that it needs to be looked into carefully,

and

(b) the indisputable facts that Vin Garbutt does included oppressive and anti-feminist material unsuitable (IMO) for general festival/concert dissemination. I have also referred to highly unsavoury sexually predative behaviour at venues (well documented in threads passim) which certain posters have hitherto failed to deplore.

All these strands carry implications of oppression and whiffs of fascism and fall, in various ways, into the remit of FAF.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 10:24 AM

(a) agreed.
(b) first sentence agreed.

I really don't think that it will prove possible to prevent men being attracted to women, and women being attracted to men, and one of them doing something with a view to satisfying that attraction. Indeed I'm not sure it would be a good idea even if possible.

Oh, the same applies to men attracted to men, and women attracted to women, as the case may be.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 10:37 AM

Like foggers I'm proud to admit to being a 'feminist' of the kind she describes and 'some of my best friends' are men :)

Backwoodsman, I'm sure you are aware that personal attacks of that kind are not encouraged on mudcat; I, for one, do not endorse your views and hope they are summarily deleted.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 10:39 AM

>>I really don't think that it will prove possible to prevent men being attracted to women, and women being attracted to men, and one of them doing something with a view to satisfying that attraction. Indeed I'm not sure it would be a good idea even if possible.

Oh, the same applies to men attracted to men, and women attracted to women, as the case may be. <<

Now that they can create sperm, maybe women can do without us now, says Les with tongue in cheek :-)

Incidentally Dianne, here is something you can get your teeth into. Right up your street.
Labour women attack 'laddish' PM from BBC

10 out 10 if you can get rid of that git.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 10:43 AM

I can't even remember if the person calling himself backwoodsperson was involved in the hitherto-mentioned flatlands quasi-orgy at a gig featuring the well-known "feminist" Alex Campbell. I was certainly not referring to this huffing and puffing caricature specifically, indeed not even thinking of him. Why would I? As someone much further down the thread kindly and painstakingly explained for the benefit of the dim, I am using the term "backwoods" to refer to a sad and retrogressive lack of consciousness prevalent among the uneducated. Transatlantic viewers might substitute "redneck". It is, presumably, a case of caps that fit.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 11:03 AM

Richard: (serious thread drift alert)

The issue at the time of the "Lincolnshire Orgy With A Campbell" was of women feeling safe (or otherwise) at music venues. I felt it a duty of organisers to try and ensure that women should not be at risk of comment, molestation or worse if attending alone. Some posters considered it their deity-given right to act as inappropriately as they damn well felt like. And, presumably, still do. It's just another aspect of institutionalised oppression.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 11:24 AM

Diane: No-one should feel unsafe. But no-one should be condemned for trying to pick someone up - so long as they know when to stop.

Les: The production and release of sperm is where some of the instincts come from - but surely over the last 40 years you have heard that women require more entertainment from men than sperm alone can provide.

Backwoodsman:   bit OTT, no? Diane may be infuriating at times (and informative at others) but usually somewhere amongst the storm of gratuitous philological exhibitionism there is a point trying to get out.

Oh - and "If the cap fits - then the event is for fun not procreation".

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 11:32 AM

As seen on a mug

"Real feminists go dutch" - sorry Richard :)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 12:04 PM

>>Real feminists go dutch<<

What you implying there Emma. My wife is Dutch.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Emma B
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 12:19 PM

no offence Les

"The modern idea to "go Dutch" no longer carries the stigma of the term's original intentions (C17th)
It is simply a recognized bit of social jargon which allows each party to know the financial arrangements of a date or social outing."

Mijn beste wensen voor uw vrouw
(I hope that means what I think it does!)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 12:49 PM

>>I felt it a duty of organisers to try and ensure that women should not be at risk of comment, molestation or worse if attending alone. <<

Molestation
Molestation is the sexual exploitation of a child or a woman by an adult for sexual gratification or for profit. Sexual abuse may include:

Fondling
Mutual masturbation
Sodomy
Coitus
Child pornography and child prostitution

Dianne, if it helps, I endorse your comments completely in relation to molestation and worse, and as an organiser try to ensure that all single people (men included) feel relaxed and safe at my venue. The same applies to couples. That is my job.

Comment is difficult, because its one persons word against anothers. However, I would hope that people who come to my venue, would feel comfortable enough to seek me out, if they were upset for any reason. What action I took would depend on the seriousness of the situation.

We have a lady in the village who comes on her own, and we make sure she is escorted back home safely, by a person who is trusted.

However, what I can't be held responsible for, is if the offended person does not come to me or a responsible lady if preferred.

In the 8 years, I have never had one complaint for this sort of behaviour. We have a lovely trustworthy group of people who come to our venue. We normally get 60 to 100 people each time.

The only times I have had to deal with people is when they have had too much to drink and are getting loud and spoiling the show. Fortunately that is so so infrequent, maybe about 6 times in 8 years.

I would like to think that all other organisers behave in the same responsible manner. There is always bound to be one bad apple in the crate, but hopefully that is very rare.

If you have had a bad experience then I am sorry to hear that, but please don't assume that all men are the same.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 12:56 PM

"the indisputable facts that Vin Garbutt does included oppressive and anti-feminist material" - a highly disputable claim. Here's a song of his that I suspect might be categorised in this way by some people - Lynda.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 12:57 PM

No Problem Emma :-)

Going Dutch is a great idea with groups of people. When I lived in Holland, I thought it was great, that a group of you could go into a cafe and the bartender kept a tab behind the bar and at the end of the night the group split the bill equally.

What a shame that couldn't work in the UK.

Oh your dutch comment means "I hope your wife has it off with lots of men"

Oh no it doesn't :-)

It means "My best wishes to your wife"

Goed gedaan Emma which means Well done Emma. :-)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:02 PM

Further thread drift

It's not about me nor is it about your 8-year-old venue. Alex Campbell who was implicated in said incident died in the mid-80s. It's about blokes being blokish, hunting in predatory packs, and the inexplicable, inexcusable coterie of women who apparently consider this OK and even welcome it.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:07 PM

Actually, it's the women who hunt in predatory packs these days. Sorry to disappoint you, Sweetums.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:13 PM

Well, there you have it. An admission of demeaning, undignified behaviour from the sea-horse's mouth.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:17 PM

>>It's about blokes being blokish, hunting in predatory packs, and the inexplicable, inexcusable coterie of women who apparently consider this OK and even welcome it.<<

But you seem to imply in most of your posts, that all men are like that. We most definately are not, and that goes for the men you have insulted over time. It is that part of your make up that I find insulting and unacceptable from you Dianne.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:28 PM

entirely off topic

I imply no such thing. I recommend a course in literacy and comprehension. Someone way down the thread said that when someone fails to understand the written word it may not have been expressed adequately. I put it to you that they probably have not read it in context and jump to their own preconceived and stereotypical conclusions.

Men I have "insulted" in this kind of discussion are those who openly boast about, indeed glory in, their loutish, blokish behaviour and attitudes.

End of.
Final IAFWAFIAWMWQ.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Weasel
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:40 PM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ

Alright, I know I'm obviously thick but would somebody clever like to tell me what the above is supposed to mean (so that I can follow this thread)

Cheers,

Weasel (who welcomes women hunting in packs - could somebody give them my address)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Rasener
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:44 PM

Get a life Dianne.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 01:49 PM

Who is supposed to be the "wise man" in this particular context?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 02:12 PM

Such hallucination. Such misplaced arrogance.

I have been addressing the topic all along, not a backwoodsperson.
Who's the "wise man"?
Me, obviously.
But gone. To a venue with intelligent, multi-gendered musicians.
Somebody tell that weasel how to use a search engine . . .

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Weasel
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 02:35 PM

Ah, thank you. (It not being a word, and it being referenced as an "Ian Anderson expression" acronym I never thought it would appear in a search)

Anyway, back to watching the fight!

Cheers,

Weasel

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 02:39 PM

IAFWAFIAWMWQ

In A Fight With a Fool It's A Wise Man Who Quits....or some other highly condescending fRoots claptrap...such as ARSS...Acoustic Rock Singer Songwriters.....as opposed to STARSS..Superbly Talented Acoustic Rock Singer Songwriters. You see? It's all in the way you put the acronym together, insulting, patronising and demeaning, or a little uplifting.


"Well, there you have it. An admission of demeaning, undignified behaviour from the sea-horse's mouth."

Nope, I've never seen men 'hunting in packs' like you claim to have, Diane, but I have seen women doing that, dressed like tarts, sexually harrassing the lads, by calling them names, being derogatory..and you know what, no-one touches them for it...and most of the lads just smile or ignore it.

Of course, if the men wolf whistled at the lasses, calling them some equally demeaning names, or spoke to them in the same sexual way as the women now do to the men, well, they'd be arrested for sexual harrassment in minutes, having been reported for it by humourless, controlling women who think that they have the right to say and do anything, 'because I'm a woman' whilst men have no rights at all. Women also seem to think they have the right to dress however they want and if a man DARES to look at them slightly askew, or with his eyes crossed, gee but they make him suffer for it!

Girl Power? Do me a favour. Total Female Irresponsibility, more like.

Abuse of men is as bad as abuse of women....and feminists should be tackling that, but of course, they're not. There were a lot of feminists who, imo, wanted ALL men tarred with the same brush....and if men are now beginning to stand up and shout out about it, shout out about being second class citizens, well good for them, because it's WAY overdue!

I tell you what else feminism has done, imo. It's opened the door on pornography. As a backlash to the men haters you've had some men who have been determined to ensure that women ARE still seen as male sex objects, now more than ever, almost to 'get their own back'. A whole generation (maybe two) has been raised with male magazines at the supermarket checkouts, clothes which even yer most swanky prostitute wouldn't have been seen dead in, and little girl's outfits that take your breath away for all the wrong reasons, as an even younger generation is raised to become the next lot of male fantasies for some men. (please note the *some*) And I'm sure it worries Dads as much as it worries Mums.

However, going back to the folk clubs and people chatting each other up...well..I'm afraid that not even you cannot regulate nature.

You cannot stop men loving women's bodies. Most of them are programmed to, Thank God, because it's called The Continuation of the Species. Some men are programmed to love men, just as some women love other women. It's ALL the way nature intended...and no-one should be castigated for being drawn instantly to someone they find attractive.

Stop with your rules and regulations, with your politically correct (correct?) ideas. Relax and let nature take its course, the way it always has done. By all means shout out for equal pay, equal respect, equal rights, but heck, give men a break...

And for every rude, arrogant man who'd try to force himself on a woman, especially in a crowded place, there are probably 10/20/50 men in that room who'd be the first to yank him away, take him outside and 'deal with him' in the age old way that most men have always dealt with other men who abuse women.

Many, many men want to protect women, you know. So try seeing the good for a change, it may bring a smile.


Richard Digence, are you out there..scribbling all this down for you next lot of songs? ;0)

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: glueman
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 04:00 PM

People drawing analogies with What is Folk Threads? This makes your typical What's Folk debate look like A.J.P. Taylor meets Roland Barthes.
Gratuitous grumping even for this teddy bear pit.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Howard Jones
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 05:57 PM

"the indisputable facts that Vin Garbutt does included oppressive and anti-feminist material"

I think it's highly disputable. He has a point of view and performs songs about a difficult subject on which there are strong feelings on both sides.   Abortion isn't a man versus women situation, a great many women are pro-life just as a great many men are pro-choice. It's something which affects us all as human beings, albeit in different ways, and one which we should all have an opinion on.

I see nothing wrong in a songwriter expressing his views on this, or any other subject. That's part of what folk music is for. You are of course entitled to disagree with those views.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Effsee
Date: 12 Jul 09 - 11:08 PM

Well said Howard!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 01:19 AM

The topic is not whether Howard Jones (or anyone else) approves or disapproves personally of anyone's contentious material. It is about whether an artist whose repertoire includes such material should be booked for a public platform from which such material may cause offence or distress.

The original case against Richard Digance displaying racist tendencies remains manifestly unproven and there is little point in pursuing it. Some of Vin Garbutt's material is undoubtedly confrontational and causes great offence and distress. It has often been suggested that he be asked not to perform some of it in front of general, unsuspecting audiences, which people may or may not regard as an acceptable compromise. Predative, intimidatory behaviour at venues is a problem for organisers to address, and it is clearly within their interests to do so if they want audiences to return. Even if the music is right-on, women on the wrong end of sexual harassment from those encouraged even in this day and age by backwoods beliefs that it is OK to behave so crassly will be offended and/or scared and not come back.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Howard Jones
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 03:08 AM

I don't want to turn this into a discussion of specific artists. As BE has said, the vaguely stated case against Richard Digance has not been substantiated, and Vin Garbutt's views have been discussed at length elsewhere. I will simply say that while he may cause offence and distress to some, there are others who applaud him for expressing an alternative point of view.

It is impossible to dissociate politics from folk song. One of the roles of folk song has always been to express political dissent. The folk revival in both the UK and US was strongly associated with political activism.

The point is that any material which addresses politically sensitive (in the broadest sense) issues, whether from the Left or the Right, is likely to give a degree of distress or offence to those in the audience who hold different views. If you accept that politics has a place in folk music, then you must be prepared to hear views put forward which you may not share.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 03:14 AM

That road has a dangerous end, Howard, for then the artist must also accept that the opposing views may be immediately expressed.

Better, surely, to say that oppression should not be advocated on stages.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Howard Jones
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 04:06 AM

Not as dangerous as the road towards censorship, in my opinion.

"Better, surely, to say that oppression should not be advocated on stages." I agree, but who is to decide what is "oppressive"? BE believes some of Vin Garbutt's material is oppressive, but others believe he is saying what needs to be said.

On the one hand, we have legal constraints to prevent the most extreme views being expressed. On the other, there are simple commercial constraints - if an artist's material is so contentious and unpopular that they fail to bring in an audience, they won't get booked. I don't even have a problem with an individual organiser deciding not to book an artist because they fundamentally disagree with the artist's message - that's an organiser's prerogative.

What I do object to is the idea that certain artists should be considered unsuitable to appear anywhere because some of their material expresses the "wrong" views. It is the idea that only "correct" political views should be allowed on stage which I find most dangerous.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Sandman
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 04:36 AM

in general,I agree with Howard,however if a performer were to sing asong in a folk club,and the song contained the sentiments/message send all immigrants back to where they came from I would walk out of the club [mid song],or alternatively complain to the organiser,and earhole the performer.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris Murray
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 05:12 AM

Instead of all of this IAFWAFIAWMWQ nonsense, I much prefer a line from Les Barker's Detritus - "Never argue with a fool for he is doing the same". I think that's very wise.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: foggers
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 05:53 AM

If we look at where the line should be drawn in terms of what views have a right to be aired and what counts as "oppressive" there are legal principles to help us; it is illegal to say things that may stir up racial hatred. This needs to be understood in the context of human rights.

In terms of human rights legislation, freedom of speech is a qualified right -i.e. it can be curtailed where it may infringe on the absolute rights of others. Absolute rights include the right to life, the right to freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment; actively racist views (or sexist - and that can be against men OR against women) would constitute degradating treatment in the eyes of the law.

For all those other more grey areas, Howard Jones is right that organisers can make the decisions about who to book with an eye on the commercial implications of choosing someone with particularly contentious views. And Capt. Birdseye is also entirely right that individual audience members can express their dissent in a number of ways.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 05:59 AM

"Vin Garbutt does included oppressive and anti-feminist material"


Rubbish.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 07:26 AM

Come out Silas, show yourself...

And identify the song of which VG's critics and specify the words, then we might think you have a clue what the topic of debate is...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris Murray
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 08:15 AM

I must say that I've never found Vin to be "anti-feminist". I don't think Pat would let him!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 08:33 AM

'Even if the music is right-on, women on the wrong end of sexual harassment from those encouraged even in this day and age by backwoods beliefs that it is OK to behave so crassly will be offended and/or scared and not come back.'

So it's 'Sexual Harrassment' for a man to express an opinion that a feminist disagrees with - even if he has, by his own lights. a perfectly humanitarian and progressive reason for holding that opinion?   And what to we mean by 'Backwoods beliefs'? Anything that a left-wing or liberal university graduate disagrees with?

Are saying that there are certain matters on which men are forbidded to express an opinion altogether (unless it's the 'right' opinion)?

This sort of priggish nonsense is exactly why folk clubs are dying.

Sorry if I'm being 'predative(sic)'.

No, actually, I'm not...

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 09:13 AM

It's certainly sexual harassment when they sidle up and yap on in "do you come here often" stylee when a lone woman is actually trying to listen to the music. Even if they have an opinion worth listening to and something anywhere approaching sensible to say it is, at the very least, ill-mannered to voice it before the music stops. If these creeps don't know how to behave at a music venue it would do everyone a favour if they didn't go there in the first place.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 09:20 AM

'A festival mainstage is not the place to expound complex ideas which have such profound personal and political implications.'

I'm glad we've got that sorted out. I can't wait to hear Dick Gaughan's version of 'Dashing Away With A Smoothing Iron'.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 09:35 AM

Borchester,

Your last post makes for interesting reading. It reads to me like you're trying to tell us something about someone in particular. Who are we talking about here?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 09:52 AM

Well Richard, I am assuming that Diane is referring to 'Little Innocents' when she spouts her posionios drivel. Some (and only some) songs on this album are anti - abortion. They are not anti - women, far from it.

Now, as for quoting words, that is a little more difficult as I have not listened to the album for several years, but I have seen Vin about six times during the last couple of years and he does not sing these songs any more as far as I am aware. I asked him to sing the siong 'Leslie'(Off the same album but about alcoholism, not abortion) but he could not remember the words!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:09 AM

Sorry for coming back again, but I was just reminded of a story - a true one, as it happens.

I was at a gig about 15 years ago at a club in London. I was sitting down the front in the middle and a group of about 3 women came and sat to my right. As I went up the bar we exchanged pleasantries (as you do) and for the next half an hour or so there was one woman who I got chatting to in that rather incoherent way you do when you meet someone for the first time.

On my left was a group of people including a bloke who would not stop talking. Everyone was very polite about it but both I and my new acquaintance were both annoyed and exchanged glances to that effect. Eyes rolled, that sort of thing.

Now, a mate of mine was in the bar so I went out for a few minutes to have a drink and a chat with him. While I was there the talking bloke came out and went up to the bar. There was another bloke at the bar who it turned out was some sort of local villain. The talking bloke made some sort of nerdy folkie remark - and the other bloke smacked him in the mouth.

Talking Bloke retreated back inside with blood dripping down his mouth. After a couple of minutes I went back in myself. I made my way past the 3 women and sat down. I noticed that my new friend was staring at me.

After a moment the penny dropped - she thought it was me that had smacked Talking Bloke. I hastily (and quietly) reassured her that I hadn't and that he'd annoyed some local hard nut in the bar.

I ended up going out with her for the next 12 months.

Funny old world.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:15 AM

"It's certainly sexual harassment when they sidle up and yap on in "do you come here often" stylee when a lone woman is actually trying to listen to the music."

Nonsense.

Thirty years ago I did precisly that, and I have been happily married to that lady for the past twenty-seven years.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:17 AM

"It's certainly sexual harassment when they sidle up and yap on in "do you come here often" stylee when a lone woman is actually trying to listen to the music."

Nonsense.

Thirty years ago I did precisly that, and I have been happily married to that lady for the past twenty-seven years.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:30 AM

Well, good for you Silas, and my best wishes to you and to Mrs Silas and all the little Silases. Fair play to you.

Having said that, my point to Borchester was that he seemed to be trying to tell us something about someone and I wondered who it was. And if we're honest, we've all seen sad bastards trying to cop off with women who clearly aren't interested and it must at the least be bloody annoying for the woman concerned.

Clearly, Silas, not every man is possessed of the sort of sexual magnetism that you and I are clearly blessed with. It's such a burden sometimes, don't you find?

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Silas
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:39 AM

Well, Chris, I have to confess that I am not exactly beating them off with a stick, but I am at least content with my lot!

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: GUEST,Chris B (Born Again Scouser)
Date: 13 Jul 09 - 10:51 AM

Silas, my dear fellow, why didn't you say earlier?

If you need a stick you can borrow mine.

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Dave Earl
Date: 14 Jul 09 - 02:28 AM

Well I hope I didn't use the "Come here often" line but the last 4 ladies with whom I have had any sort of "thing" were all met at folk club/festival/event.

Some sort of common interest I suppose.

Dave

Subject: RE: Richard Digance
From: Acorn4
Date: 14 Jul 09 - 03:28 AM

So that's why Morris Dancers have sticks - to beat off the hosts of predatory women!