[TV] King Danny Dyer

[BadFish]

It is a standing joke in our house that Danny Dyer's daughter is called Dani Dyer. I don't really understand why it is funny, but each time someone says 'Danny Dyer's daughter is called Dani Dyer' there is much hilarity.

If she sold health food they could me Danny Dyer's Daughter Dani's Diets

 

[Tricky Dicky]

It is a standing joke in our house that Danny Dyer's daughter is called Dani Dyer. I don't really understand why it is funny, but each time someone says 'Danny Dyer's daughter is called Dani Dyer' there is much hilarity.

Hmm, I guess it's funny to some and I do like a good alliteration, this one does nothing for me - and I'm still none the wiser to who this is - but I get the feeling I really don't want to.

 

[Hamilton]

A standard Netflix subscription costs 26p a day...

(I'm happy to pay for the Beeb too, though!)

Absolutely. I don't have a massive beef with Netflix - although all they provide is visual content: no radio stations, no news outlet, no website etc.

However, the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph, the Express, the Mirror, the Guardian, Sky etc. all cost significantly more than 41p a day, and some have a very anti-BBC agenda.

I'm happy to subscribe to Netflix. Although I am concerned about a Netflix film getting an Oscar nomination. Not because of the quality of the film, but because I think that the last thing we need to be doing is encouraging people to consume film content in their homes (most likely surrounded by second screens), rather than seeing cinema as a social exercise. Just my feeling that this encourages an isolated society. Thoughts on that?

 

[Hamilton]

I'm glad to know that History teaching has improved since my children went through school then (although there's precious little in your curriculum about Kings and Queens, or great historical events like the War of the Roses or the English Civil War). It will be a long time though - whole generations of people whose only knowledge of history is what I outlined in my post will have to pass on - before things change. The vast majority of the British state school educated public don't have a clue about history.

My observations, incidentally, are based on hard evidence. My children all went to different schools (two of them to grammar schools) and I know what their history lessons included and what they didn't!

Hard evidence?

There are over 8 million children in schools in the UK.

So, to be in anyway statistically valid, you need a decent sample size of kids. Let's say 1% as a low base.

So, you're telling me that the 80,000 children you have sired and sent off to schools have all come home for their tea in the evening and told you that all they've learned at school is something about WW1 and how rotten Britain was during the slave trade?

No, I thought not.

It's not hard evidence. It's a one-off story.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Hmm, I guess it's funny to some and I do like a good alliteration, this one does nothing for me - and I'm still none the wiser to who this is - but I get the feeling I really don't want to.

Of all the knowledge and people in the world, not knowing this individual isn't something to lose any sleep over!

 

[Napper]

surely wont be long before D.Dyer is banned. He's a bit to male for life these days

 

[Bakero]

Hard evidence?

There are over 8 million children in schools in the UK.

So, to be in anyway statistically valid, you need a decent sample size of kids. Let's say 1% as a low base.

So, you're telling me that the 80,000 children you have sired and sent off to schools have all come home for their tea in the evening and told you that all they've learned at school is something about WW1 and how rotten Britain was during the slave trade?

No, I thought not.

It's not hard evidence. It's a one-off story.

I think what he means is back in his day all the kids could recite their times tables and chant the names of kings in chronological order whilst the teacher beat them round the head with a metal bar.

 

[BrickTamland]

surely wont be long before D.Dyer is banned. He's a bit to male for life these days

I know it’s a cheap shot, but it really can’t be coincidental that all the ‘being a man will be banned soon’ snowflakes have no grasp of basic spelling and grammar. Can it?

 

[Bakero]

I know it’s a cheap shot, but it really can’t be coincidental that all the ‘being a man will be banned soon’ snowflakes have no grasp of basic spelling and grammar. Can it?

I've made that connection before. There is a definite correlation but I think [MENTION=365]Napper[/MENTION] was joking, right?

edit. Actually, having looked at his post history, it seems I may have given too much credit.

 

[Mellotron]

Yeah, women rule the world don't they. Paranoid rubbish from scared little men.

My son will do just fine thanks. He's 12, he's pretty good at everything and he's already done three years of learning Mandarin, which is a little bit more important than worrying about the output of the BBC when it comes to his future.

You keep pissing your pants though. About nothing.

We all like Danny Dyer btw. The Mrs fancies him, me and the sprog find him funny. I don't see any way that his being on TV can add to your ridiculous end of days scenario for men.

So many things in the world to care about, you're wasting your time on incel nonsense.

Thanks, put it better than I could so won't bother now.

When I saw the word "femstroy" I rolled my eyes so hard they almost came out of my head.

 

[Bakero]

Thanks, put it better than I could so won't bother now.

When I saw the word "femstroy" I rolled my eyes so hard they almost came out of my head.

That one word said it all, didn't it?

 

[BrickTamland]

Think we’re being too harsh. Let them enjoy their freedom whilst they have it before the feminists and BBC finalise their conspiracy to lock away anyone with a pair of balls!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm glad to know that History teaching has improved since my children went through school then (although there's precious little in your curriculum about Kings and Queens, or great historical events like the War of the Roses or the English Civil War). It will be a long time though - whole generations of people whose only knowledge of history is what I outlined in my post will have to pass on - before things change. The vast majority of the British state school educated public don't have a clue about history.

My observations, incidentally, are based on hard evidence. My children all went to different schools (two of them to grammar schools) and I know what their history lessons included and what they didn't!

I was taught about Romans. Saxons, Vikings etc in junior schoold. Then at senior school we went through the Tudors, Stuarts, Hanoverians and Victorian era culminating in taking Political History for O level

My own children did a similar trot through history throughout their school life, and my granddaughter is now taking Roman studies & Latin for A level at college.

 

[Durlston]

Looks like he's still got a huge cocaine problem.

His upper body looked stiffened, rubbing his nose constantly and the way he tightly held his National Television award on Tuesday night were all signs he's still got a massive problem.

He's 41. Isn't it time he grew up and knocked that stuff on the head? There won't be a happy ending.

(for those of you with long memories I'm now six years clean. Life's circumstances have changed hugely for me with my health).

 

[Gilliver's Travels]

Oh God, for so many reasons, which build on each other. But since you ask...

1.) Dyer is an individual without particular virtues that I can discern.

2). He is an actor whose stock-in-trade is portrayal of and also reinforcement of stereotypical grisly male types...

3). ..types whose promulgation supports the BBC's social engineering policy of demonising masculinity so as to "femstroy" "gender-normalcy"

4). OK Maybe the programme hits some 'Horrible History' buttons... I don't agree (because HH is quite elegantly wrought by experts) but even if it were, put it on CBBC - but NO! I wouldn't want this crap poisoning my kids.

5). I pay for this crap, and the only alternative for me is to commit a crime by non-payment of my licence fee. Take away the licence fee and I couldn't care less what the BBC produces, let them die the death as their viewers renounce their supra-PC politics and flood to Netflix.

6). I discern a disgracefully toxic thread in BBC policy of putting up men in male roles who are ignorant/weedy/incompetent/desperate/weak/frothy etc etc. I refer you to my points 2 & 3.

It stinks.

So to draw together these points here, the BBC's apparatchiks are attacking masculinity, they are attacking men and if you are a (non LBGTetc) male they are attacking YOU, lessening your ability to stand up as a good, virtuous dude.

And Dyer's loud, ignorant persona as shown in this programme plays perfectly into their egregious narrative.

Oh, and PS 7). BBC is capable of doing bloody amazing things with history for all ages, where is the virtue in this dismal programming?

Back at you Lawro's left foot!

I enjoyed this. Best if read in a full-on Brian Sewell voice. "Oh, their egregious narrative!!"

 

[brightn'ove]

Hard evidence?

There are over 8 million children in schools in the UK.

So, to be in anyway statistically valid, you need a decent sample size of kids. Let's say 1% as a low base.

So, you're telling me that the 80,000 children you have sired and sent off to schools have all come home for their tea in the evening and told you that all they've learned at school is something about WW1 and how rotten Britain was during the slave trade?

No, I thought not.

It's not hard evidence. It's a one-off story.

You are talking to somebody that has previously tried to claim that an individual anecdote isn't anecdotal evidence.

 

[Southern Scouse]

And left to die on the side of the road by the New Forest which is now known as Rufus Stone.

Plus.... my ancestor officially found and returned his body to London, giving us freedom of the New Forest in perpetuity...
According to family legend.....
Not sure if that gives me the right to hurd sheep through it though?

 

[Stato]

When I saw the word "femstroy" I rolled my eyes so hard they almost came out of my head.

These made up portmanteau words really grate, especially when, like this one, they don't even work. Google tells me that destroy's deriviation is apparently from the Latin word 'struere' meaning to build or assemble. Adding the 'de' makes it 'un-build' or 'un-assemble'. Adding the 'fem', instead of the 'de' presumably to indicate feminism doesn't make a word that means destroyed by feminism, it makes a word that would indicate the opposite: 'built by feminism'. It's the same mistake as adding 'lexsic' on the end of words to try to indicate an inability to do something. 'lexsic' is the part of 'dyslexic' that refers to reading and writing, not to inability, so 'maths-lexia' means 'maths-writing', not 'can't do maths'.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

These made up portmanteau words really grate, especially when, like this one, they don't even work. Google tells me that destroy's deriviation is apparently from the Latin word 'struere' meaning to build or assemble. Adding the 'de' makes it 'un-build' or 'un-assemble'. Adding the 'fem', instead of the 'de' presumably to indicate feminism doesn't make a word that means destroyed by feminism, it makes a word that would indicate the opposite: 'built by feminism'. It's the same mistake as adding 'lexsic' on the end of words to try to indicate an inability to do something. 'lexsic' is the part of 'dyslexic' that refers to reading and writing, not to inability, so 'maths-lexia' means 'maths-writing', not 'can't do maths'.

Indeed. The inability to do maths is dyscalculia.

 

[Gwylan]

You are talking to somebody that has previously tried to claim that an individual anecdote isn't anecdotal evidence.

Yesterday, he was claiming that because he could do sums in his head, everyone his age could do sums in their heads. He's not too hot on evidence-based argument