Sign Of The Times....

Quite reasonably, vampire fans expect a theatre production to have some bite, with plenty of gore and violence. It is horror, after all. But one leading theatre has put a trigger warning on a Dracula show – because it features blood. Bosses at the Lyric Theatre in Hammersmith, west London, fear audiences may be disturbed – apparently not realising that being disturbed is precisely what the customers are paying for.

We all know why this warning is needed - it's to avoid snowflakes rushing to the nearest ambulance chasing lawyer and suing the theatre. 

Those dusting off their capes to see theatre’s adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula will be warned: ‘Morgan Lloyd Malcolm’s Dracula – based on the novel by Bram Stoker – contains themes of gender-based violence, including visual allusions to sexual assault; death, including of children; blood; abduction; depictions of grief and distress following trauma; the use of weapons; and reference to hanging.’ The theatre adds that the production includes ‘language and scenes that may impact some audience members’. The details of a mental health charity are being handed out in case any audience members are particularly unnerved by the show.

This is merely the showbiz equivalent of the warning 'Contains nuts' on the packet of peanuts they hand out on a flight - if they still do that at all, I haven't been on a flight for years. ButI do have streaming services and trigger warnings are on everything these days, and for the most bizarre reason: 'animals hunting' was one the other day. On a nature documentary! 

The trigger warning on Dracula follows one on Hamlet at the National Theatre in London, where audiences were alerted to ‘coercive behaviour’ in the play. Shakespearean actor Brian Blessed, 88, hit out at theatre bosses as ‘ignorant pigs’, saying: ‘It’s f***ing Shakespeare... the greatest writer on the planet.’

And we remember what he wrote about lawyers, don't we Brian? 

Enough Is Enough - Knock The Bloody Thing Down!

Angela Rayner has been accused of ignoring the concerns of bereaved Grenfell families over plans to demolish the tower block where 72 people died.

It's still standing? Good grief, the fire was in 2017! Knock the eyesore down and be done with it! 

What should happen to the site of the catastrophic fire has always split opinion, with some bereaved and survivors feeling the tower should remain in place until there are criminal prosecutions over the failings which led to the fire.

You should all know by now that's almost certainly never going to happen.... 

Grenfell United claimed Ms Rayner 'refused to confirm how many bereaved and survivors' had been spoken to about demolishing the tower, saying she was ignoring their voices 'on the future of our loved ones' gravesite.

She does that to everyone, you're not a special case. 

The Government has previously said structural engineering advice remained unchanged 'in that the building (or that part of it that was significantly damaged) should be carefully taken down'. It is expected more details will be set out by the end of the week.

The final report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, published in September, concluded the disaster was the result of 'decades of failure' by government and the construction industry to act on the dangers of flammable materials on high-rise buildings.

And like every other failure of government and regulation, no-one will lose their job over it.  

University Isn't For Everyone...

The mother of a University of Exeter student believed to have killed himself after a “disastrous” set of exam results has accused academics of failing to make her son feel like he was “wanted”.

*sighs* Here we go again... 

Less than a month before his death last year, Harry Armstrong Evans, 21, told his tutor in an email that isolation during the pandemic had affected his mental health and his performance in his third-year physics and astrophysics exams. But neither academic staff nor the welfare team spoke to the student face-to-face after the email and his mother, Alice, told the inquest into his death on Thursday that her son had not understood he could do re-takes or repeat his final year.

Surely a 21 year old should be expected to do something for himself? It's infants that need spoonfeeding, isn't it? 

Addressing the head of the department, Tim Harries, she said academics should have done more to help her son, who had performed well until then. She said: “You should have contacted Harry and said: ‘What’s going on here?’

We were so thrilled he was going to Exeter. We didn’t expect Harry to take his life. It was definitely as a result of these exams.”

Sure, it couldn't possibly be anything else. Anything closer to home. Could it? 

A group of parents, including the mother and father of Natasha Abrahart, a University of Bristol physics undergraduate who had severe social anxiety and killed herself a day before she was due to give a “terrifying” oral exam, called for the government to introduce new laws to protect students.

Good grief! No good can come from mollycoddling adults as if they were children, yet we seem hell-bent on it, don't we?

The Decline Of Personal Responsibility Accelerates...

In a landmark case that has deep implications for other higher education institutions, the parents of Natasha Abrahart successfully sued the University of Bristol under the Equality Act.

Abrahart, 20, a physics undergraduate who suffered from severe social anxiety, died a day before she was due to give a “terrifying” oral exam in front of teachers and fellow students.

Shouldn't oral exams be expected to be a part of university life? 

Her parents sued the university under the Equality Act for not taking reasonable care of their daughter’s wellbeing, health and safety, arguing it did not do enough to help her despite staff knowing she had a disability and was struggling deeply.

In a judgment issued on Friday at Bristol county court, judge Alex Ralton said: “There can be no doubt that there was direct discrimination, especially once the university knew or should have known that a mental health disability of some sort was preventing Natasha from performing.”

So, the wicked university did nothing to help her? Hmmm, not quite. 

But not enough, according to her parents, who seem to have expected the university to accommodate their daughter, and not their daughter to accommodate the requirements of her chosen subject: 

Abrahart said his daughter struggled to speak to people she did not know, particularly people in positions of authority.

“Expecting Natasha to take part in oral assessments was like expecting a student in a wheelchair to take an exam in a room at the top of a long flight of stairs.”

Except it isn't. The student can be provided with an exam in a ground floor, but still has to take the exam. 

And the university did offer alternatives:

“Our staff’s efforts also included offering alternative options for Natasha’s assessments to alleviate the anxiety she faced about presenting her laboratory findings to her peers.

“Given the significant impact this decision could have on how all higher education providers support their students, we are reviewing the decision carefully, including whether to appeal.”

Maybe on appeal, we'll find out why those offered alternatives weren't deemed suitable, because it's not explicit in this article: 

The university has argued that it had tried to offer Abrahart alternatives to the oral presentation.

But the judge observed that, “whilst a few ideas” regarding possible adjustments were “floated” by the university, “none were implemented”.

Why not? Is it because she turned them down? It would be good to know, wouldn't it? 

A Snowflake Opines...

I remember the first violent message I received on Instagram. It was a veritable bingo of hate: he mocked me, told me no one would want to look at my “dirty” crotch – though his language was worse, of course. He asked if “sluts” like me, moaning until they “get what they want”, was “what our country was coming to”, before reminding me that nothing was going to change. He finished by saying he hoped I was gang-raped “senseless” by 20 men. But, he didn’t use the word “men”. He used a racist slur instead, finishing the message with five middle-finger emojis.

So you blocked and deleted and got on with life. right? 

I remember how my chest tightened and I grew hot with fear.

Oh... 

I hadn’t been surprised to become the target of online hate.

Wait, you expected it? 

When abuse fills up your DMs and your inbox, there’s no way to escape it.

Yes there is. Block, report, delete.

Those in charge of tackling of this abuse (sic) are usually men. They don’t really understand the impact it has on victims and survivors. They haven’t been in our shoes.

Some have, sweetie!  

No single bill from parliament will solve this, and no single software update will either. A holistic and collaborative effort from the platforms, lawmakers and independent initiatives who know the reality of the issue, not just the theory, would be a positive start. Until then, we’ll share our locations with friends, add another dick pic to our screenshots folder and delete messages with trembling hands, hoping that one day our safety will finally become a priority.

Why should it? Everyone's safety should be a priority. What set of genitalia you possess shouldn't give you a head start, given young men are assaulted and killed at a rate of at least two to one... 

I Guess You Don't Need To Be Well-Read To Be A Literary Agent...

...at the height of last year’s Black Lives Matter protests I was sent a list, with accompanying photographs, of the top editors working across the major publishing houses in the UK. When I read it I burst into tears. It showed a sea of almost totally white faces...

So whines Natalie Jerome, who clearly never published any history books, or she'd surely have noticed she's living in a majority white country.

...for years, loud and growing calls to diversify its teams have been pretty much ignored. No wonder the industry today finds itself in a complete mess on race.

Does it? According to whom?  

There is a crippling and toxic silence around everyday racism and how it manifests in the media: erasure, sidelining, stunting of careers, the sheer mental exhaustion of operating daily in a predominantly white space and the routine grind of being marginalised.

Surely there must be countries where you'd feel more at home, then? I'm sure they have publishing houses in Africa, and I've no doubt they don't fret over seeing a sea of black faces around the board table... 

Meanwhile, I’ve observed within publishing the increasing mention and use of “sensitivity readers”. What on earth are they, you might ask.

No, I've no need to - I suspect I already know.  

Essentially a little freelance cottage industry of marginalised folk has sprung up, post-Clanchy, to check that books aren’t racist, disablist or any other -ist before they’re sent to print.

Who is stupid enough to voluntarily employ a group of censors and allow th...

Oh. Of course. 

What this means is that the predominantly white editors commissioning and publishing books featuring characters from diverse backgrounds are now checking these books with readers from these backgrounds in order to ensure publication does not cause accidental offence.

Which is an impossible task, because as soon as they've appeased one group, another will spring up, or the existing groups will move the goalposts. 

It's the fallacy of identity politics, and anyone giving people like this woman and her fellow activists a foot in the door deserves to be held hostage to their demands forever. 

Remember When Adults Wrote For This Newspaper?

I have a fantasy and it goes like this: a political party is formed, running on an anti-social-media platform. It campaigns on a pledge to ban social media. (“SWITCH IT OFF” is its straightforward, and elegant, slogan.) The party wins a general election and at midnight, on what comes to be known as Social Media Freedom Day, the prime minister pushes a giant button that blocks all access to social media. Crowds cheer. On the anniversary of Social Media Freedom Day – which becomes a bank holiday, of course – children burn effigies of Mark Zuckerberg and dress up as the Twitter bird.

The ravings of a demented madwoman? Well, yes. It's a 'Guardian' column, after all! What else would you expect?

I write this as someone who owes her career and her partner to social media. I had no journalism qualifications, (Ed: Really...?) connections or experience when I began blogging in the mid-2010s, and through Twitter I was able to get a paid internship that gave me my start in journalism.

But as time has gone on I have become more and more certain that the solution to many of the most pressing issues of our time is simply to switch social media off.

We can all do that, any time we want!

Of course I could delete all my social media accounts. Cancel my season ticket to The Discourse; stop watching as a new villain of the day is crowned on Twitter. You think I don’t want to do that?

What's stopping you? 

I need a responsible adult to do it for me. I’ve had enough of the bad feelings machine. Won’t somebody switch it off? Please? Can we switch it off?

Aren't you one of those? Oh, silly me. Of course you aren't... 

She's Been Removed To A Gulag To 'Educate Herself', Comrades...

The director of one of the UK's biggest heavy metal festivals has "taken a step back" from her role after coming under fire for...

Smashing up a hotel room? Biting the head off a bat? Satanic imagery? 

...an "uninformed" tweet.

Err... 

Bloodstock's Vicky Hungerford was criticised after tweeting her annoyance at people putting their preferred pronouns on their email signatures.

It is a common practice in the LGBTQ+ community, and used by trans allies as a show of solidarity.

Oh, FFS! It's nothing of the sort, it's a tedious modern invention to let virtuesignallers prove how hard they genuflect to the latest trends. 

Ms Hungerford said she was "genuinely upset I have caused upset".

Well, you shouldn't be. 'Upset' is what these people feed on - they crave it like vampires crave the blood of virgins. 

A statement from Bloodstock Festival said: "We are deeply sorry to everyone affected by these uninformed comments.

"For now, Vicky has taken a step back from Bloodstock effective immediately, and will be taking the time to properly educate herself for a better understanding."

And if that isn't the creepiest thing you've ever read, I don't know what would be... 

Stop Pandering To These Idiot Snowflakes!

Much of Dan Guthrie’s life has been haunted by...

A family tragedy? Escaping war and strife? Being caught up in a natural disaster like a tornado or earthquake?

...a disturbing mechanised figure resembling a tethered black slave boy, which is supposed to strike a bell hourly in the centre of Stroud.

*blinks* 

He first passed the automaton, which is known in clockmaking circles as a jacquemart, on his way to primary school in the 2000s and then secondary school – and now on his daily journey into work in the Cotswold town.

Has he not heard of Google Maps and their ability to find you an alternate route? Do all roads in Stroud lead past this automaton? 

“It is an offensive racist relic from the transatlantic slave trade, and the fact that it is still up in Stroud is a mystery to me.”

Oh, I can help you with that. It's because the world doesn't revolve around you.

...the debate about the clock’s future has become increasingly fraught since the town’s Conservative MP, Siobhan Baillie, criticised local anti-racists campaigning to have the divisive figure relocated. Baillie said “a certain minority of people with loud voices have an unquenchable desire to be constantly finding things to be outraged at” in a statement published in the local press and on her website last month.

Good lord, I think we might have found an actual real Conservative for once!  

Naturally, the usual suspects spring into action:

The founder of the group, Polly Stratton, a Stroud-based English teacher, says Baillie has poisoned the debate about the clock, which has been moved twice during its history and was last restored in 2004.

By expressing an opinion that the majority in the town probably have, Polly? 

“We didn’t look for this fight...

Oh, really? What, teaching doesn't keep you busy enough? 

... – all we are doing is raising awareness about a racist caricature that is having a traumatic effect on many people of colour in Stroud. Their views should be heard, not shouted down by someone with a public platform,” she says.

Like...you're trying to do to everyone else? 

“We’re not trying to hide it or tear it down. We want it on public display in a museum.”

To do that, wouldn't you have to tear it down? Or do you plan to build the museum around it? 

For an English teacher, you don't seem very bright. Or to appreciate what English words mean...

Baillie – who has spoken in parliament about the distress caused by anonymous racist and misogynistic social media trolls – has also worked with the Kick it Out charity, which campaigns against racism in football. But it firmly disagrees with her stance. “Whether it’s on the football pitch, online or in our town centres, we have to fight racism wherever we find it,” says Tony Burnett, the CEO of Kick it Out. “With that in mind, I would remind Ms Baillie that her work with Kick It Out on online anonymity does not give her a free pass to undermine anti-racist groups.”

What on earth gives this twerp the right to pronounce on this matter? Is the automaton depicted kicking a football? 

"Nee-Naw, Nee-Naw, It's The Snowflake Police!"

Dead moles should not be left hanging from a barbed wire fence in the Cotswolds, police have said.

The grisly sight has been causing distress in the area near Cowley Manor and police want it to stop.

'Police'..? Really? 

PCSO Andrew Biddell is even going to put up a sign asking people not to string the dead mammals on the fence.

He said the moles have been found in the lane that goes round the back of Cowley Manor and past the Girlguiding Gloucestershire HQ, heading towards The Green Dragon.

Issuing a Community Alert, he said: “I will be putting a sign up asking for the moles to not be hung from the fence.

“This issue is causing a lot of distress to people and I would like to get it stopped.”

So a bunch of townies feel 'upset' at the sight of a country practice going back decades before you were born, and you think it should cease immediately? 

But, realising you've no power to stop it, you're going to litter the countryside with hectoring signage?