King Chuck discussion zone: new parasite, same idiot hat

Yep, and extensive dogpiling has not helped matters.

Lagamorph wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Qikz wrote:https://twitter.com/sonofedge/status/1568246801093824513

My grandmother didn't care either. She was moaning about her TV programmes being cancelled:

"They didn't show the Chase and now Emmerdale isn't on! I've had a bloody 'nuff of it, I'm going to bed"

Yeah my mum was asking me how to find the cancelled episodes of Emmerdale on catch-up and was none too impressed when I informed her that they had infact been fully cancelled until at least next week, but likely until after the funeral.

Should be all up to date now, with all cancelled episodes having been broadcast at alternative times.

rinks wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Qikz wrote:https://twitter.com/sonofedge/status/1568246801093824513

My grandmother didn't care either. She was moaning about her TV programmes being cancelled:

"They didn't show the Chase and now Emmerdale isn't on! I've had a bloody 'nuff of it, I'm going to bed"

Yeah my mum was asking me how to find the cancelled episodes of Emmerdale on catch-up and was none too impressed when I informed her that they had infact been fully cancelled until at least next week, but likely until after the funeral.

Should be all up to date now, with all cancelled episodes having been broadcast at alternative times.

Whoop de strawberry floating doo

You don’t want your mother to be happy?

twitter.com/paulisci/status/1571150760435654658

Classic British tradition to queue past the dead monarch

twitter.com/dmreporter/status/1572897682997522434

Really pathetic.

Dual wrote:Really pathetic.

I dunno, I think it's nice they still hold hands

I always maintain eye contact with my wife while walking places, keeps the spark alive.

sawyerpip wrote:I always maintain eye contact with my wife while walking places, keeps the spark alive.

Disgusting public display of affection. You should be ashamed.

Compressed lips at a funeral. Disgraceful. He should be strutting about with a duckface.

sawyerpip wrote:I always maintain eye contact with my wife while walking places, keeps the spark alive.

Does this mean you're constantly in front of her walking backwards as you stare?

She must find that rather annoying.

Vermilion wrote:

sawyerpip wrote:I always maintain eye contact with my wife while walking places, keeps the spark alive.

Does this mean you're constantly in front of her walking backwards as you stare?

She must find that rather annoying.

No, I'm the husband so I make her walk backwards.

Tomous wrote:

floydfreak wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:

Tomous wrote:Beckham is in the queue for the Queen apparently

Is he actually queuing because a number of celebrities have been allowed to skip the queue. Phill and Holly are the latest to do so.

twitter.com/joemichalczuk/status/1570766201005150209

Why does Schofield look furious?

probably no rent boys around

It may have been late so consider it lenience. It's 2022 and everyone should know "ha ha! Gay!" jokes belong in the 90s, when they didn't belong there either.

User banned for 1 month, TBA.

Members should be aware there are various LGBTQIA+ members of our community who are out, and at least statistically speaking probably a lot more who aren't. You are not vilifying a public figure who faced considerable undue scrutiny when they came out, but these members too. That is completely unacceptable.

If you post in this way, you can expect your membership privileges to be revoked permanently. It is an act of kindness to not do that.

Mettā.

Green Gecko wrote:

Tomous wrote:

floydfreak wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:

Tomous wrote:Beckham is in the queue for the Queen apparently

Is he actually queuing because a number of celebrities have been allowed to skip the queue. Phill and Holly are the latest to do so.

twitter.com/joemichalczuk/status/1570766201005150209

Why does Schofield look furious?

probably no rent boys around

It may have been late so consider it lenience. It's 2022 and everyone should know "ha ha! Gay!" jokes belong in the 90s, when they didn't belong there either.

User banned for 1 month, TBA.

It's a gooseberry fool joke and it definitely belongs in the past, but a month's ban? I don't know if Floydfreak has a history of anti-gay jokes, but he was probably referring more to Schofield's alleged liking for younger men than just making an anti-gay joke.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertain ... 045760.amp

There is a very low likelihood in my opinion that anybody and everybody would be aware of that context, and whatever the intentions were, it is the impact that matters most. So without providing that context, it's both harmful, and negligent. For the benefit of doubt, one should include that context if they wish to criticise someone - and given the topic, what kind of random sideline would that be?

To refer to the article everyone is supposed to just know about, exactly because of the media blowout following Schofield's outing (which is itself questionable imo), that is a legal relationship aged 17-21 with anyone of any older age.

A "rent boy" can refer to pretty much anyone who is young, gay and young or "good"-looking. It is defined as a "young male prostitute".

Devoid of context, and only if that matters, it amounts to "man is attracted to men, lol". Do we really need to justify that?"

It's not OK to vilify a gay person, or more generally gay people, if they are suspected of being merely sexually deviant, whether because of, or beyond (in addition to) homosexuality. As it plays even worse into the homophobia that being queer is itself deviant, indecent, wrong, or even sick. That gay people do messed up, wrong things.

1 month is lenient.

Green Gecko wrote:There is a very low likelihood in my opinion that anybody and everybody would be aware of that context, and whatever the intentions were, it is the impact that matters most. So without providing that context, it's both harmful, and negligent. For the benefit of doubt, one should include that context if they wish to criticise someone - and given the topic, what kind of random sideline would that be?

To refer to the article everyone is supposed to just know about, exactly because of the media blowout following Schofield's outing (which is itself questionable imo), that is a legal relationship aged 17-21 with anyone of any older age.

A "rent boy" can refer to pretty much anyone who is young, gay and young or "good"-looking. It is defined as a "young male prostitute".

Devoid of context, and only if that matters (I don't think it does), it amounts to "person is attracted to men, lol". Do we really need to justify that?"

It's not OK to vilify a gay person, or more generally gay people, if they are suspected of being merely sexually deviant. As it plays even worse into the homophobia that being queer is itself deviant, indecent, wrong, or even sick.

1 month is lenient.

It's pretty well known that Schofield allegedly likes young men. And there are plenty of us here that freely make jokes about hookers.

It's up to you, but I think a month's ban is ridiculously harsh, unless Floydfreak has a history of homophobia on here.