Gransnet forums

AIBU

I was so disappointed

(211 Posts)
NanKate Tue 30-Dec-14 19:48:34

I set up the Gordon Buchanan wild life programme. (Snow wolf family and me) and settled down to watch his trip to the Canadian Arctic. It was totally spoilt for me by his blasphemy. I could never watch it with my grandchildren.

To set the record straight I am not stuffy or highly religious (though I do believe) but hearing him say twice 'Christ, Jesus wept' it was so unnecessary but I suspect that if I complained to the BBC they would say it was after the watershed.

If anyone had made a comment about Mohammed the BBC would have been apologising profusely.

Tegan Sat 03-Jan-15 21:32:41

Attenborough would not have used the words that Gordon did. They are different types of presenter, albeit with the same aim. Gordon Buchanan is passionate about what he does. I can't believe that people are debating a few words which were NOT contrived. And I'd like to know what the people who are critiscising him at this moment in time are doing to save these animals? Not much, I would imagine....

Elegran Sat 03-Jan-15 21:22:51

Intrepid wildlife presenters are human animals too. They have human reactions. Without their human reactions they might as well just leave an unmanned camera running and go and sit in the pub with a monitor and a pint. This one's reaction did not please everyone. A lot of reality TV does not please everyone. It offends our idea of what is human. If we say we don't like it we are told not to watch it then.

No-one has forced anyone to watch this shot. It is entirely voluntary if they see it, and given all the publicity anyone who is likely to be offended will be able to avoid hearing the dread words.

Ana Sat 03-Jan-15 21:13:30

Oh yes - thanks jingl! grin

Ana Sat 03-Jan-15 21:12:04

Yes, but that's just the point, Elegran - none of us is a supposedly intrepid wildlife documentary presenter, so it would be understandable if we were alarmed at being confronted by a wolf.

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 03-Jan-15 21:10:32

- Casuality -

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 21:07:07

jings, old bean, where have I argued on this thread that there is no god?
Rhetocial question because I haven't. I accept that other people believe in gods various. What I don't accept is that I (or anyone else) automatically have to follow their religions' rules just so I don't offend them by accident they don't take offence here there and everywhere.

Besides, I like arguing vehemently. Hadn't you noticed? You do too sometimes.

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 03-Jan-15 21:06:51

inglbellsfrocks looks round for someone who's being "theatrical and contrived".

Elegran Sat 03-Jan-15 21:05:46

I'd love to suddenly release an untamed wolf in the faces of each of the Gransnetters who have posted on here (no favouritism, each and every one) and record their first, unrehearsed reactions.

I don't think "Nice doggie" or "Dearie me" would be among them. If any wre well enough in control of themselves to be coherent, I would salute them, and I might recommend them to the BBC as wildlife presenters. The recordings could double as demo tapes for their auditions.

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 21:02:15

loopy, grin

I think quite a number of us would probably have found we knew far more Old Norse words than we were ever aware of in that situation.

loopylou Sat 03-Jan-15 20:57:56

Personally I think I might have said something somewhat more Anglo-Saxon and def needing beeping out if I'd been that close to a wolf.......... blush

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:56:58

Yes, ana, in reply to your last smile

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:56:30

Interestingly, Mary Beard complained on Twitter recently about something she thought was patronising, but she wrote f++ing in her tweet. That seems patronising to me. Since everyone knows what word she meant, why 'disguise' it?

I wonder if the diction police would disapprove of hers too? Or would they accept that someone as clever and good with words as she is can choose their own words regardless of whether they like her choices?

Just wondering. As you do.

Ana Sat 03-Jan-15 20:55:44

Oh, not literally superior then. Just assuming the mantle.

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:52:17

Saying how other people should speak, what words and phrases they're not allowed to use in case someone decides to have hurt feelings if they use this word or that phrase. It's a patronising kind of superiority.

Ana Sat 03-Jan-15 20:44:14

Superior people? Superior in what way? confused

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:43:12

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Attenborough uses such phrases when he's not on air.

Nonu Sat 03-Jan-15 20:37:27

I really am sad to say I don"t think

Jesus H Christ
Jesus wept

are particulary modern expressions
.
I do believe they were around in the 50"s & 60"s and probably even before , just some have chosen to resurrecte them, on Television ,shame on them adds nothing to the presentation IMO.But then what do I know ??
tchhmmtchhmm

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:34:08

Buchan did nothing wrong.

thatbags Sat 03-Jan-15 20:33:39

Oh heck! People aren't allowed to be theatrical, contrived and immature any more either! Blasphemy's peanuts compared with that!

It's about control, all this. Religious rules and behavioural rules to control how people behave and what they say. To make them conform to superior people's ideas.

Stuff that.

Galen Sat 03-Jan-15 20:25:09

Gordon is of a younger generation than DA.
They do seem to use all language in a different manner.

Nonu Sat 03-Jan-15 19:47:50

I am on the side of Nankate, I thought Gorden Buchan"s terminology Theatatrical, Contrived and Immature. There would have been many more expressions he could have used, Attenborough would have .

Perhaps this what we have to put up from now onwards, shame really !!

After all, it wasn"t as if he was there alone with these wild animals, there would have been a camera crew + people to take care of things if it got out of hand [if you get my drift].

tchhmm]tchhmm

PS I agree with the posts of 18.28 and 18.33.

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 03-Jan-15 19:31:27

But I don't think Zeus worship is. grin

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 03-Jan-15 19:30:29

Nah. It's all blasphemy. (If it's still a living religion I would think)

Ana Sat 03-Jan-15 19:28:49

As far as I know, Zeus didn't issue any commandments to his followers, so blasphemy wouldn't apply in that case.

Elegran Sat 03-Jan-15 19:26:15

If he had said "Zeus!!! That is scary!" would he have been blaspheming against Zeus, or does it only work if it is a god of which the hearer is a follower?