Welcome to GUBU.ie - lurkers are obviously welcome but please consider joining in the discussion!! Register here to create an account and start posting.

RIP Charlie Kirk

The burning issues of the day
Bubblypop
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:09 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#251

Post by Bubblypop »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 9:16 am I imagine certain posters quite believe that Anne Boleyn and Queen Charlotte were both black, given recent casting.
You are aware that there are portraits of these people? It's truly amazing that you believe black people didn't exist in England in medieval times
Jequ0n
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:51 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#252

Post by Jequ0n »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 9:16 am I imagine certain posters quite believe that Anne Boleyn and Queen Charlotte were both black, given recent casting.
I expect very little from people when it comes to history knowledge.

What’s worse is people believing that this “artificial diversification” is a progressive and positive thing when it’s in fact just writers and casting crews giving into popular demand because they don’t want to be accused of discrimination.
I can accept that this nonsense will continue to happen in films and tv shows. What I find truly unacceptable is the editing of literary works to cater to oversensitive readers.
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#253

Post by ceannairceach »

Jequ0n wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 9:43 am I expect very little from people when it comes to history knowledge.

What’s worse is people believing that this “artificial diversification” is a progressive and positive thing when it’s in fact just writers and casting crews giving into popular demand because they don’t want to be accused of discrimination.
I can accept that this nonsense will continue to happen in films and tv shows. What I find truly unacceptable is the editing of literary works to cater to oversensitive readers.
To be honest when I read recently that on a list of people lauded in so called “Transgender History Month” were Shakespeare, Anne Frank and the Mona Lisa I gave up all hope they were ever rational.
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#254

Post by ceannairceach »

Bubblypop wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 9:32 am You are aware that there are portraits of these people? It's truly amazing that you believe black people didn't exist in England in medieval times
I’d love you to prove where I ever said that.

But then you absolutely suck at nuance and actually understanding a point.

So just to clarify you DO believe that Anne Boleyn was actually as black as the actress tapped to play her Jodie Turner Smith??
Attachments
IMG_7011.jpeg
IMG_7011.jpeg (265.18 KiB) Viewed 423 times
Jequ0n
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:51 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#255

Post by Jequ0n »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 10:52 am To be honest when I read recently that on a list of people lauded in so called “Transgender History Month” were Shakespeare, Anne Frank and the Mona Lisa I gave up all hope they were ever rational.
I’m not surprised. Education has been replaced by ideology.
I once read a claim that Shakespeare “might have been supporting transvestism” because he had male actors play female characters in his plays. Mind you, this is was in a university exam, not an online forum. And this was way before this trans insanity kicked off. People are becoming more stupid by the year.
Jequ0n
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:51 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#256

Post by Jequ0n »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 10:59 am I’d love you to prove where I ever said that.

But then you absolutely suck at nuance and actually understanding a point.

So just to clarify you DO believe that Anne Boleyn was actually as black as the actress tapped to play her Jodie Turner Smith??
Don’t be absurd. The bold letter “B” around her neck clearly indicates that she is black.
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#257

Post by ceannairceach »

Jequ0n wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 11:14 am Don’t be absurd. The bold letter “B” around her neck clearly indicates that she is black.
My apologies I will now of course submit myself to the nearest reeducation camp. /s
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#258

Post by ceannairceach »

Jequ0n wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 11:13 am I’m not surprised. Education has been replaced by ideology.
I once read a claim that Shakespeare “might have been supporting transvestism” because he had male actors play female characters in his plays. Mind you, this is was in a university exam, not an online forum. And this was way before this trans insanity kicked off. People are becoming more stupid by the year.
Ian McKellern who I quite frankly had more hope for - announced an all trans (ie all male) version of Twelfth Night meaning he’s missing the point of the play’s plot spectacularly!
Bubblypop
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:09 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#259

Post by Bubblypop »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 10:59 am I’d love you to prove where I ever said that.

But then you absolutely suck at nuance and actually understanding a point.

So just to clarify you DO believe that Anne Boleyn was actually as black as the actress tapped to play her Jodie Turner Smith??
You clearly suck at understanding a point.
There are portraits that show what they looked like, why would anyone think they were black?
And you were the one that claimed there were no black people fighting in 1066, without any proof .
Jequ0n
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:51 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#260

Post by Jequ0n »

Bubblypop wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 1:37 pm You clearly suck at understanding a point.
There are portraits that show what they looked like, why would anyone think they were black?
And you were the one that claimed there were no black people fighting in 1066, without any proof .
I don’t see where this poster claimed that there were categorically no black people in Anglo Saxon England.
There were some, but their numbers were so minimal that they really needn’t be represented in this case.
It’s just unnecessary and annoying to have this diversity obsession shoved down your throat all the time.
Imagine the reactions if several unnecessary white characters were added to the Shaka Zulu storyline, just to add a bit of diversity. Same principle but the reactions would most likely be very different.
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#261

Post by ceannairceach »

Jequ0n wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 2:26 pm I don’t see where this poster claimed that there were categorically no black people in Anglo Saxon England.
There were some, but their numbers were so minimal that they really needn’t be represented in this case.
It’s just unnecessary and annoying to have this diversity obsession shoved down your throat all the time.
Imagine the reactions if several unnecessary white characters were added to the Shaka Zulu storyline, just to add a bit of diversity. Same principle but the reactions would most likely be very different.
I very much did not say there were no black people in the time of King Harold, I - correctly - noted the shoehorning of black people into historical roles where they would not be is helping no one.

Queen Anne did not have a black lady in waiting, a black soldier did not fight right next to King Harold on the battlefield and Queen Charlotte was not black.

Forced diversity or this nonsense about “colour blind casting” is doing more damage than they think they are helping.
Bubblypop
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:09 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#262

Post by Bubblypop »

ceannairceach wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 2:56 pm I very much did not say there were no black people in the time of King Harold, I - correctly - noted the shoehorning of black people into historical roles where they would not be is helping no one.

Queen Anne did not have a black lady in waiting, a black soldier did not fight right next to King Harold on the battlefield and Queen Charlotte was not black.

Forced diversity or this nonsense about “colour blind casting” is doing more damage than they think they are helping.
So you are stating, as fact, that there were no black people fighting in wars? That no black soldiers or mercenaries existed in England in 1066.
Amazing. What jobs did they do?
Guburnor
Site Admin
Posts: 583
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:54 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#263

Post by Guburnor »

Bubblypop wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 3:34 pm So you are stating, as fact, that there were no black people fighting in wars? That no black soldiers or mercenaries existed in England in 1066.
Amazing. What jobs did they do?
Please cut this sort of thing out:

"So you are stating, as fact,...."


This is getting a bit tedious. Allow me to help clear it up. The poster is stating that they do not believe King Harald's right hand soldier was likely to be black. They are not stating that as fact that there were no black soldiers or mercenaries existed in 1066.

Can we leave it there? Thanks.
knownunknown
Posts: 2936
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2021 6:55 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#264

Post by knownunknown »

Start a thread about it and then argue as much as you like. That’s what Charlie would have wanted.
ceannairceach
Posts: 492
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 3:48 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#265

Post by ceannairceach »

Guburnor wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 4:21 pm Please cut this sort of thing out:



This is getting a bit tedious. Allow me to help clear it up. The poster is stating that they do not believe King Harald's right hand soldier was likely to be black. They are not stating that as fact that there were no black soldiers or mercenaries existed in 1066.

Can we leave it there? Thanks.
Thank you - the constant rewriting of clear posts I made was becoming incredibly tiresome.
Bubblypop
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:09 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#266

Post by Bubblypop »

Guburnor wrote: Sun Sep 28, 2025 4:21 pm Please cut this sort of thing out:



This is getting a bit tedious. Allow me to help clear it up. The poster is stating that they do not believe King Harald's right hand soldier was likely to be black. They are not stating that as fact that there were no black soldiers or mercenaries existed in 1066.

Can we leave it there? Thanks.
Ah yeah, I get you , certain posters are treated differently
Guburnor
Site Admin
Posts: 583
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:54 am

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#267

Post by Guburnor »

Bubblypop wrote: Mon Sep 29, 2025 10:35 am Ah yeah, I get you , certain posters are treated differently
If you feel there is an issue by all means open a discussion on the modding forum, happy to discuss.
knownunknown
Posts: 2936
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2021 6:55 pm

Re: RIP Charlie Kirk

#268

Post by knownunknown »

I don’t agree with all this cancelling. I never did. When one side did it I tried to warn them what would happen if the roles were reversed. We are now seeing it in action.

Musk and his crew are calling on cancelling Netflix. Telling others to do it, perpetuating this cancel culture.

Do I think what this director in question said was disgusting? Absolutely, and the show he created was abhorrent bordering on child abuse. No parent should ever show this to their child. The fact that it got a 7 year old rating is not their fault, but the fault of some ideologically driven department for rating television shows. The government have control over this already.

This story does however highlight the incestuous link between the trans ideology and hatred.

https://twitter.com/i/trending/1973599599337341262

Post Reply