Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 03:26:19 PM

Login with username, password and session length

The Tiger Who Came To Tea [split topic]

Started by gilbertharding, August 24, 2021, 04:28:48 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

gilbertharding

And today on twitter, beloved children's picture book The Tiger Who Came to Tea is trending, because all the usual suspects (GBNews, JHBrewer, old Uncle Tom Cobley and all) are laughing at 'attempts by lefties' to 'have it banned' because it 'promotes outmoded gender stereotypes' and 'celebrates rape' or something.

Obviously this is outrageous, so it has spawned outrage. Endless tracts of outrage.

And, predictably, all this outrage is based on the fact that a single person (or group, perhaps it was more than one person) with no power whatsoever to ban a book, might perhaps have mused aloud about the subject matter and themes of the book from a modern day perspective.

Now, tell me about the culture war.

phantom_power

That's a classic example really. Some people call for something from the past to be re-examined and maybe re-evaluated, and then (usually right wing) people get their shit in a twist and think that it is trying to be banned.

Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: gilbertharding on August 24, 2021, 04:28:48 PM
Now, tell me about the culture war.

Well this Rachel Adamson seems happy to lob her grenade into an ammo dump.

gilbertharding

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 24, 2021, 05:29:17 PM
Well this Rachel Adamson seems happy to lob her grenade into an ammo dump.
And who the fuck is she?

Exactly.

Honestly - you used the word 'disingenuous' in a post up thread, and I'm just amazed you didn't catch fire.

Glebe

Quote from: gilbertharding on August 24, 2021, 04:28:48 PMAnd today on twitter, beloved children's picture book The Tiger Who Came to Tea is trending


Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: gilbertharding on August 24, 2021, 05:34:36 PM
And who the fuck is she?
Exactly.

She is "the gender equality lead" at the Scottish Funding Council and co-director of the aptly-named Zero Tolerance, "a campaigning organisation working to prevent violence against women and girls through tackling gender inequality". So, if you like, a well-meaning and overzealous nobody, so there's nothing to see here? Hmm. Maybe some have wrongly interpreted her comments as a call for the book to be banned, but the indy100 article on the story  - whose author clearly sympathises with Adamson's thesis (https://www.indy100.com/news/tiger-who-came-to-tea-rachel-adamson-b1907972) - didn't find any. Despite claiming that "scores of Twitter users ignored the intricacies of her argument", all of the critical tweets they quote correctly identify this as simply criticism from a campaign group, not an actual policy from anyone with the power to ban things.

Quote from: indy100She clarified that she was not pursuing a "great burning of books agenda", but suggested parents and nurseries should "look closely at their bookshelves" and consider the narratives they'd like their children to absorb.

Obviously, parents and nurseries do already consider what's on their bookshelves very carefully, and they are happy to let their children absorb these narratives, so what is she really saying here? She covets the power to compel parents and nurseries to remove these harmful, outdated tracts. But she's just one misguided fruitcake, you may say. Yet the sort of language she's using and the 'morality' she's appealing to is all around us these days, and will continue unabated without firm principled opposition. She certainly doesn't get a whiff of pushback from the BBC Radio Scotland interviewer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZytJQajybok&t=7s), quelle surprise.

Quotemight perhaps have mused aloud about the subject matter and themes of the book from a modern day perspective.

Y'see, it's not a 'modern day perspective', because we know that the family unit depicted in this book is still an overwhelmingly common, relatable, natural and productive way for families to live, even in this modern day. Hers is a futuristic dystopian perspective. And it doesn't just come out of the blue, the seeds of concentrated ideology masquerading as compassion are planted, and it'd be complacent to just laugh off a campaign to remove 'gender stereotypes' (i.e. truths) from children's books as the musings of one harmless woker-than-thou wackaloon. "The idea is that if you tackle it when children are very young, then hopefully we have a better chance when they get older [...] to mould their mindsets and their attitudes and make them respect and care for each other," she says, either naively or chillingly, or both.

Indy100 notes that Adamson's thesis was supported and defended on LBC by a barrister, who said it was "more about having a conversation about more harmful gender stereotypes and tropes that are played out within children's books". Well, they're getting their conversation, but what's the betting the conversation they were hoping to have was with people who either already agree with them or have no moral line of defence?

Jumblegraws

That's a lot of waffle and folksy epithets to say "I'm shit-scared of progressives"

Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 25, 2021, 05:27:43 PM
BLAH BLAH BLAH HOW DARE A WOMAN THINK SHE KNOWS BETTER THAN PARENTS, I AM OUTRAGED ABOUT THIS OUTRAGE

Bernice

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 25, 2021, 05:27:43 PM
Obviously, parents and nurseries do already consider what's on their bookshelves very carefully, and they are happy to let their children absorb these narratives, so what is she really saying here? She covets the power to compel parents and nurseries to remove these harmful, outdated tracts.

This is entirely your extrapolation, and a wildly unreasonable one. I wouldn't even consider her a 'misguided fruitcake', just someone offering a basic and unsurprising feminist reading of a children's classic. Someone responding to a work of art. Speech.

jobotic

Jesus. How dull that was to read.

My daughter loves The Tiger who Came To Tea. we read it together a lot. We also live in a simliar family set up (although I'm not the only one who goes to work and I don't wear a sharp mod suit). We have also discussed how other people's family set ups aren't the same as ours and that's just fine.

I reckon that the ""the gender equality lead" at the Scottish Funding Council" would probably be cool with that but I wonder where that places us on the right-wingers' woker-than-thou wackaloon scale?

Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: Jumblegraws on August 25, 2021, 06:28:50 PM
That's a lot of waffle and folksy epithets to say "I'm shit-scared of progressives"

This is not 'progressive'. And I'm not scared of that lot. Any of that lot had a go I'd deck the lot of them.[nb]This is an Alan Partridge quote, not a literal threat of violence[/nb]

Quote from: Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse on August 25, 2021, 06:46:51 PM
BLAH BLAH BLAH HOW DARE A WOMAN THINK SHE KNOWS BETTER THAN PARENTS, I AM OUTRAGED ABOUT THIS OUTRAGE

BLAH BLAH ANY CRITICISM OF 'PROGRESSIVE' IDEOLOGY MUST BE OUTRAGE

Quote from: Bernice on August 25, 2021, 07:30:32 PM
This is entirely your extrapolation, and a wildly unreasonable one.

She's telling parents and teachers, think more carefully about the books you read your children. So if you've thought about it and decided to read them this book, you obviously haven't thought about it carefully enough. Where does this sort of mentality lead?

QuoteI wouldn't even consider her a 'misguided fruitcake', just someone offering a basic and unsurprising feminist reading of a children's classic. Someone responding to a work of art. Speech.

And I wouldn't seek to stop her saying any of it, or of stopping her working towards the delusional utopian goal of destroying all 'gender stereotypes' so that never again will a woman be harmed (by a man; presumably they can carry on scratching their own eyes out). But if a "basic and unsurprising feminist reading" of The Tiger Who Came To Tea is that it promotes 'rape culture', what is the 'progressive' moral argument against that? Is there one? Indy100 and BBC Radio Scotland certainly didn't have one.

See one of the many reasons I'm not on twitter is so I don't get distracted by this sort of potty drivel (also brevity's not a strong point, obviously). So if 'twitter storms' are reported in a thread about sage genius John Cleese, this is where I'm going to hear about and respond to them.

phantom_power

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 26, 2021, 01:40:07 PM


She's telling parents and teachers, think more carefully about the books you read your children. So if you've thought about it and decided to read them this book, you obviously haven't thought about it carefully enough. Where does this sort of mentality lead?


I think you are the only person able to answer this as it is coming entirely out of your own imagination

Endicott

She's telling parents and teachers, think more carefully about the books you read your children. So if you've thought about it and decided to read them this book, you obviously haven't thought about it carefully enough. Where does this sort of mentality lead? then you've just come to a different decision to her, which is fine isn't it, and nobody is saying otherwise.

gilbertharding

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 26, 2021, 01:40:07 PM
See one of the many reasons I'm not on twitter is so I don't get distracted by this sort of potty drivel.

And yet, here you are.

Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: gilbertharding on August 26, 2021, 02:13:14 PM
And yet, here you are.

Oh I'm often distracted by potty drivel on cookdandbombd, which is why I don't need to construct a much bigger sluice to let loads more in.

Quote from: Endicott on August 26, 2021, 02:12:58 PM
She's telling parents and teachers, think more carefully about the books you read your children. So if you've thought about it and decided to read them this book, you obviously haven't thought about it carefully enough. Where does this sort of mentality lead? then you've just come to a different decision to her, which is fine isn't it, and nobody is saying otherwise.

Not yet, but without a cogent progressive argument against this line of thinking, give it a few years!

Bernice

Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 26, 2021, 01:40:07 PM
She's telling parents and teachers, think more carefully about the books you read your children. So if you've thought about it and decided to read them this book, you obviously haven't thought about it carefully enough. Where does this sort of mentality lead?
To the gulag, no doubt. Alternatively, you've just restated your wild extrapolation that to voice any critique is to wish to enforce it upon all.

Quoteif a "basic and unsurprising feminist reading" of The Tiger Who Came To Tea is that it promotes 'rape culture', what is the 'progressive' moral argument against that? Is there one?

I can think of a few. Have you tried making one?

Quote
See one of the many reasons I'm not on twitter is so I don't get distracted by this sort of potty drivel
For a man so above the fray, you seem to have become very excited about this utter non-story.

Quote
Not yet, but without a cogent progressive argument against this line of thinking, give it a few years!

"This line of thinking" is decades old, has been argued against as much as it has been restated and has not yet led to the collapse of Western society.


phantom_power

Sorry, which is the more likely to take us (further) down the dark road of fascism? Encouraging people to question what is in books, or condemning them for doing so?

Cold Meat Platter

Imagine worrying about Boris Johnson's Britain being too 'woke'.

Jumblegraws

#18
Quote from: Autopsy Turvey on August 26, 2021, 02:39:02 PM
Oh I'm often distracted by potty drivel on cookdandbombd, which is why I don't need to construct a much bigger sluice to let loads more in.
I rarely see you provide focussed responses to points other people make though. What I do see a lot from you is quasi-blogposts that meander from the post you're ostensively responding to within a sentence or two. For example:
QuoteY'see, it's not a 'modern day perspective', because we know that the family unit depicted in this book is still an overwhelmingly common, relatable, natural and productive way for families to live blahblahblah...
A chunky paragraph (springing from someone else's single use of a phrase) that only has a shot at pertinence if you imagine the word "ubiquitous" slotted in front of "modern day perspective"

Which is to say that I don't believe it's other people's "drivel" distracting you, rather it's your own sef-indulgent need to shit out quasi-blogposts in front of a ready-made audience.

gilbertharding

Quote from: Jumblegraws on August 26, 2021, 03:06:16 PM
I rarely see you provide focussed responses to points other people make though. What I do see a lot from you is quasi-blogposts that meander from the post you're ostensively responding to within a sentence or two. For example: A chunky paragraph (springing from someone else's single use of a phrase) that only has a shot at pertinence if you imagine the word "ubiquitous" slotted in front of "modern day perspective"
Which is to say that I don't believe it's other people's "drivel" distracting you, rather it's a sef-indulgent need to shit out quasi-blogposts in front of a ready-made audience.

And also

Quote from: upsidedickheadY'see, it's not a 'modern day perspective', because we know that the family unit depicted in this book is still an overwhelmingly common, relatable, natural and productive way for families to live blahblahblah...

It is, patently, a modern day perspective. As in, it is one, singular, modern day perspective. No-one except him was claiming it to be the universal modern day perspective.

Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: phantom_power on August 26, 2021, 02:47:54 PM
Sorry, which is the more likely to take us (further) down the dark road of fascism? Encouraging people to question what is in books, or condemning them for doing so?

It depends on the book! What if the book is Why Fascism Is Wrong? No but seriously, I don't see fascism at the end of either of these approaches, but I take the  enviably concise point.

Quote from: gilbertharding on August 26, 2021, 03:23:25 PM
It is, patently, a modern day perspective. As in, it is one, singular, modern day perspective. No-one except him was claiming it to be the universal modern day perspective.

This too is fair enough, although as Bernice says:

Quote"This line of thinking" is decades old,

Which is quite right, 'progressives' have been criticising 'stereotypes' in children's books since even I was a child, so there is almost an element of nostalgia about this argument. It's a perspective that's more dated and unrepresentative of modern reality than the books that are being maligned.

Quote from: Bernice on August 26, 2021, 02:44:25 PM
I can think of a few. Have you tried making one?

As you can imagine, progressive arguments don't come naturally to me! I haven't seen many on this subject though, except 'oof it's a bit much', and that's a shame, we don't want it to appear that the only people who object to this sort of argument are Clarkson-fellating gammon swine.

QuoteFor a man so above the fray, you seem to have become very excited about this utter non-story.

I just didn't think it was sufficient to treat her argument like the twisted brain-wrong of a one-off woman-mental. This individual may currently have no power to affect real change, but she represents a movement that has been growing for many years and isn't going to pipe down anytime soon.

QuoteImagine worrying about Boris Johnson's Britain being too 'woke'.

It's not his Britain, it's all of ours, so when someone perceived as a right wing populist is in power there will likely be forceful and opposite left wing non-populist reactions in the fields where such folk dominate, eg schools and media.

mothman

Well, I certainly wish I'd known about this when I came home the other week to find MrsMoth and our eldest with a mattress stuck halfway up the stairs and in desperate need of assistance. I would have had to state firmly and clearly that "for me to provide much-needed physical strength would be to foster perceptions of "sweeping in to save the day," thus strengthening male saviour myths, and by the way when will my dinner be ready?"

pancreas

Instead you beat them both into bloody pulps and went out on the lash. (I hope.)


The Dog

You should think VERY carefully before you criticise a tiger, even if it has already eaten.

Glebe

Quote from: Glebe on August 24, 2021, 06:28:34 PM

This topic is of split off from the Cleese woke doco thread just to give that context.

bakabaka

Hopefully this is the 20th time this has been posted here this week: https://youtu.be/LpsJ1Yf8Jc4?t=562

The book is set in the 1950s or 60s. I think it even mentions a grocer boy. So child labour is probably more of a concern in the book than a tiger coming round and eating all your food.

king_tubby

I prefer the reading of it where the mother is an alcoholic. She has drunk all daddy's beer, and was consequently too fucked to do the shopping. See the picture in the cafe at the end? She's captivated by daddy's pint.

Kankurette

A couple of women does not = all feminists. This is like that gender neutral Santa thing. I see our resident idiot troll has bought it.
Quote from: Cold Meat Platter on August 26, 2021, 02:56:46 PM
Imagine worrying about Boris Johnson's Britain being too 'woke'.
They saw a black person on telly once. PC gone mad!