Last evening. Stephen’s Green.

(Thanks Niamh Guckian)

46 thoughts on “Yas

    1. Joe Small

      +1

      Most of us have a sense of humour but abortion, humour and website promotions are a bad fit.

        1. mildred st. meadowlark

          Sure, aren’t you renowned for your own impeccable good humour ro. One man’s funny is another man’s drivel.

      1. SOQ

        Some spotty juvenile though it was an opportunity to self promote on the back of a serious issue so yes it had a purpose. Except same genius forgot to get the website up and running first. Website not even registered ffs.

  1. Baz

    just the sort of arrogance and blind stupidity generated from a silo that will only serve to steer many fence sitters to a no vote.

    1. postmanpat

      Fence sitters will probably just stay at home anyway. Everyone has made there mind up at this stage. Both campaigns are just annoying now. I had a youngfella and a young wan trying to hand me Yes flyers yesterday 10 yards from each other. I grew up in the 80’s where kids were fed the guilt trip about wasting paper and the trees being chopped down. No one seems to care these days.

  2. Anomanomanom

    Father Dougal: ‘Oh, did I tell you, Ted, Fun Land’s coming to the Island! It’ll be here of Saturday.’

    Father Ted: ‘Oh, yes, that’s the fairground thing, I wouldn’t have that much interest in that type of thing myself to be honest.’

    Father Dougal: ‘Oh, come on Ted, they’ve got a spider-baby!’

    Father Ted: ‘A what?’

    Father Dougal: ‘A spider-baby, you know it’s kind of a Freak Show thing, you know, the body of a spider, but it’s actually a baby?’

    Father Ted: ‘How is it a baby, does it a have a nappy on or something?

    Father Dougal: ‘No.’

    Father Ted: ‘Well, does it have the head of a baby?’

    Father Dougal: ‘Aehm, no.’

    Father Ted: ‘Well, if it looks like a spider, and it doesn’t actually gurgle or anything, how do you know it’s actually a baby?’

    Father Dougal: ‘They keep it in a pram.’

    Father Ted: ‘Are you absolutely sure about this? You’re not confusing this with a dream you had or anything?’

    Father Dougal: ‘No, honestly, I saw it on the news, honestly, oh, wait now, actually, now that you say it, it was a dream.’

          1. Paul

            You make such valid points, your mammy must be so proud. Find another bandwagon to jump on, haven’t you got a strike to be organising or some letters to be pilfering?

  3. Frill the 8th

    ah would ye all calm down

    Its funny
    and for those offended

    Get a grip ffs

    ya have Hotels filled with yanks visiting only to hoist up banners outside our hospitals
    and you practically have every pole in the State demonstrating some form of No-Sider crack pottery

    at least this is not trying to let on its Fact or Truth
    Nor is it attempting to canvas any voter

    Fair Play to them
    replace all the posters with this sorta stuff

    1. rotide

      +8 legs
      We don’t agree on much these days Frilly, but you’re absolutely spot on here.

        1. rotide

          I’m not a hurling fan*, it would never work

          *Unless the dubs are in with a chance to win something, then obviously I’m a dyed in the wool true blue expert who’s been on the hill since a child of 5

          1. rotide

            Never set foot in parnell park, but can wax lyrical about the chances of 5 in a row. Absolutely true dub.

          2. Paul

            Whatever abuse and stick you get on here for being a contrary rogue rotide, I for one enjoy your input.

  4. Ron Dolan

    Could be construed as an attack on those with birth defects and abnormalities. I know its not, but it comes off as crass and childish.

    Has no real purpose in the debate but if I am being honest, its probably just slightly less accurate than some of the No posters I have seen about the place.

  5. kerryview

    What a bunch of tut-tutters! So now it’s not OK to poke fun or satirise anything? When did we become a bunch of Mary Whitehouses? Bring back the day days of OZ. Bring back the Free Press. God I’m getting old.

  6. :-Joe

    lol… You think this is bad?..

    After witnessing the biased rte promotion of pious, puritanical, religiulous fundamentalist, ignorant, unreasonable, illogical and deceitful, mysogonistic insanity…. which for over half the population is an acceptable level of discourse in their personal backward anti-progressive idea of this country..

    I would say it’s a very fair reflection, parody and accurate satire of what’s really going on and fair play in general.

    If you think the subject of abortion can never be funny then you have no real sense of what comedy actually is.

    Go and watch “Citizen Ruth 1996” Dir by Alexander Payne.

    You don’t have to be on either side of the argument to enjoy it, it’s a clever, funny and all-round great film showing the past, present and future of this issue and what we are about to experience here in the next twenty-five years based on the history of what has happened already in the US and elsewhere before.

    Get out and vote and brace yourselves, this anti-evolutionary dogshit madness is only warming up….

    :-J

    1. Pat

      +1

      Decent parody of the hysterical lies being touted by the creepy No posters all over the country

      1. :-Joe

        Ye, the use of campaign meme posters in general…

        The whole goddamn system is out of order….

        :-J

    2. Termagant

      Why do you sign all your posts? Sure we know it’s you, it says your name up at the top.

      1. :-Joe

        Various reasons,

        Habit, personal style, a quiet little nod to letter wrighting and a protest against the brevity and concision of discourse through most mainstream media and the newest medium of human cyborgs becoming and while using, machines to interact with artificially intelligent social networks of their own creation.

        .. Joking aside, mainly to add a little spice, liven things up with that ‘je ne sais quo’… ‘un certain panache’ !! … -their words not mine.

        Why does it matter or bother you?

        :-J

    3. painkiller

      “pious, puritanical, religiulous fundamentalist, ignorant, unreasonable, illogical and deceitful, mysogonistic insanity…. which for over half the population is an acceptable level of discourse in their personal backward anti-progressive idea of this country..”

      This is how you label a group of all-sorts whose you don’t agree with it but it’s easy apply that very same attributes to the modern regressive liberal movement. You just need to replace religious with dogmatic and misogynistic with gynocentric.

      I’m not voting but the no side won the Claire Byrne show debate fair and square. They appealed to values and morality and they were level-headed, nipped name-calling in the bud and moved quick on false-equivalences. The debate focused on the legal and medical access currently in place, which made the debate a little less juicy for the folks in Repeal jumpers looking for their hourly dose of moral outrage.

      1. Nigel

        I actually have more respect for the No side than for this sort of tone-policing must-keep-the-libs-in–their-place nonsense.

        1. :-Joe

          I’d have more respect for the no side if they had better arguments based on reason, logic, common sense and the wider scope of reality for everyone.

          I’m still waiting for a solid argument that doesn’t end with “well, babies cannot be allowed to die!!!”. Ok sounds good and would be ideal but they do and will continue to die unless all the problems that lead to unplanned pregnancy are resolved first.

          The list is very very long….. maybe you should focus on that instead?.. Hmm?

          I think painkiller is on the no side but as for libs in their places I’m not sure what you meant exactly.

          :-J

      2. :-Joe

        ” This is how you label a group of all-sorts whose you don’t agree with it but it’s easy apply that very same attributes to the modern regressive liberal movement. You just need to replace religious with dogmatic and misogynistic with gynocentric. ”

        I didn’t label anyone in particular or a specific group or even mention a side I was on either so you’re assuming a lot. I agreed and disagreed with what was said but was interested to hear both sides and opinions from various people.

        Although I was being critical of rte and claire byrne for the time honoured tradition of having no respect for journalism, dealing with serious political issues with any respectable level of balance and fairness, having no backbone in general by jumping at any opportunity for stirring the shit for their own ratings, selfish, corrupt motives and mercantile ends.

        Meanwhile, the willfully ignorant cheerleaders and unfortunately, coerced and deluded victims in at least half of the mainstream turned any chance of a factual debate into a punch and judy show or for some, a hoe-down with pistols and played right into the hands of rte and the establishment in performing the whole circus for free.

        You call them all-sorts, I would be more specific and call it just another typical rte circus and some of the main attraction performers were not just on the stage they were also in the audience.

        Your next point, ye I would agree that there are many problems with modern neo-liberalism yet the same, even more so could be said of neo-conservatism and in particular, republican fundamentalist extremism, also making a big comeback in europe and in Ireland like almost everywhere else in the west.

        The biggest problem, as always is what do you mean when you speak and what do you understand when you listen when certain terminology and language is being used? You keep throwing the word liberal around but do you even understand the history of the term liberalism and how it has evolved from what’s now called classical liberalism?

        Classical Liberal and Conservatives, neo-liberal or whatever version of modern liberal term you choose, in no way compares to the insanity of extremist, fundamentalists in neo-conservatism.

        If you think, for example democrats in the us are liberals then you are wrong(and not alone) because they are in fact conservative or so-called “centre-right” but are even more fully “hard right-wing”.

        Like the tories have been for an even longer time in britain, the republicans are not a political party anymore and they are far from any form of conservative political philosophy.

        Republicans for a long time were the party of anti-democracy, anti-politics, anti-regulation anti-workers/human rights if it got in the way of corporations and making wealth but now they are extremists with policies and actions dismantling even the concept of governance, justice or any shade of democracy and are posing an existential threat to the planet and human life itself.

        Why am I talking about this in relation to the abortion debate in Ireland? Look at who the base voter support is in the us for the republicans.

        All religiulous fundamentalists, extremists, racists, mysogonists and you guessed it… the anti-abortionists. You don’t even have to look closely, just think about it, I am not saying anything radical or even controversial. It’s all being reported in the news and accross all types of media on a daily basis and for years.

        If you replace religiulous and mysogonistic with dogma and gynocentric you will be implying the same thing. Thanks for the alternative wordplay but I think you confused synonym with opposite but honestly, I think you might not know what your taking about at all.

        If you think the no side won or any side wins or loses then your missing the point of all this completely and newsflash for stubborn ignorance and extremism, foeteses / babys will continue to die just like everyone else regardless of what happens with the 8th..

        :-J

        1. painkiller

          Neo-liberalism is the idea that a free-market economy is efficient – so low taxes on capital, privatisation and low regulation – you, know… Milton Friedman and all that. It was never clear to me that social libertarianism was part of the ideology. I think neo-liberalism is concerned more with allocation of capital and market efficiency than anything else.

          Neo-liberalism and classical liberalism have almost nothing to do with the post-structuralist current cultural-Marxism movement of inter-sectional identity politics that is run like an out of control critical theory classroom, seeking to eradicate the existing set of social and cultural structures instead of understand them and seek to reform them accordingly. They want to tear things down, rather than petition. In argument, they lean on relativism to avoid engaging and when they lose, the revert to position that everything is fractal and infinitely complex, all the while nesting arguments in false-equivalences. It’s a horrendous movement that sits firmly in the modern activist left, and political parties that are socially centre left love it because it distracts people from how centre-right their economic ideas have become…they pander to this movement.

          I do not like people on the right at all, but the people on the left I describe above are far more terrifying – they genuinely believe they are a force for good but they have nothing but contempt.

          I will leave you The Tarantulas by Nietzsche, which describes them beautifully: http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/29

          1. :-Joe

            You make some interesting points, you’re not thinking in terms or speaking from extreme polemics anyway.

            The problem with capatilism or neo-liberal economics is the lack of regulation to force the scam artists out to the fringes and diminish them to the bare minimum or to some kind of balanced state.

            I don’t think that true free market capitalism has ever had the chance to fully prove or disprove it’s efficacy or efficiency. I think that’s also true of communism but it just happened to fail and then completely collapse first before capatilism could beat it to the punch.

            The religiolous fundamentalists who were not political, were mobilised to vote by the republicans during the bush snr campaign era becasue he wasn’t popular with the base conservatives who didn’t trust him.

            Now they have evolved and are part of an extremist base including the racists and all the other lunatics like trump etc and their actions are risking the death of the planet and mankind along with it.

            Ireland has a ready-made fundamentalist group and already very vocal so that’s why I make the comparison between the us republican extremists and the current climate here.

            Thus spoke zarathustra.. ye I get that striving for equality is in many ways a complete waste of time and not necessarily a necessary ideal or even what it appears to be at all but I wouldn’t be all in on promoting Nietzchian nihilism or Rand selfishness either.

            Human/Gender/Worker rights and a fair share seems to work well under most cicumstances.

            The gender vs sexuality issue and how it has split is interesting.

            BTW, have you been reading/watching/paraphrasing Jordan Peterson?

            :-J

        2. painkiller

          And really, you should get away from the Democrat-Republican paradigm. It really is constricting. There are things that these parties jump on – like Occupy Wallstreet, like Women’s March. They don’t make them, but they look at the crowd and calculate whether they can benefit. As they say, politics is downstream from the culture….and I am talking about culture, not politics.

          And I was saying that while you describe the so-called conservative movement as religious and misogynistic….it is easy to see the modern activist left movement is dogmatic and gynocentric.

          On the dogma front: I thought I saw it all until I had to see long term gay rights activists being thrown under the bus in recent years because they saw transgender issue being a separate movement – transgenderism being a gender-identification issue rather than a sexual-orientation issue. These activists who were vocal in a time when it was highly unpopular to be vocal, now you have in-group, out-group power dynamics.

          On the gynocentric front: they are not interested in just equality anymore. That much is very obvious at this point.

    4. Wait For It

      Coincidentally, ‘Citizen Ruth’ was the IFI’s Mystery Matinee yesterday.

Comments are closed.