I was so disappointed

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..........

loopy,

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.

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.

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

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.

- Casuality -

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.

Oh yes - thanks jingl!

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.

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....

If he had met a wolf while out for a ramble, astonished surprise leading to expletives would be understandable. But as Nonu says, this was a wildlife film. He is an experienced presenter. And more to the point, he was accompanied by at least one other person. It was,partly, fiction as most documentaries are. I still can't understand why bags keeps insisting that trying to prevent people from saying things that will upset other people arises from a 'patronising kind of superiority'. There are many words and expressions and attitudes common twenty or thirty years ago which are illegal today in the UK and the world is a better place than it was as a result. What a pity we've trashed other sensitivities. Because some people think they don't matter anymore.

I agree with everything you've said in that post, Lilygran, not from any religious point of view on my part.

The concepts of tolerance and open-mindedness seem to have gone by the board on this thread. I honestly don't understand comments such as 'There's no reason for anyone to be so easily offended.' If someone is offended, then there is a reason, even if you, personally, don't get it...

I thought it was open-minded not to mind what people say when it is perfectly obvious that they mean no offence. I thought it was open-minded to let such things pass. When someone clearly does mean to be offensive it is a different matter.

Threads occur on GN quite frequently in which people 'vent' about new idiomatic expressions that annoy them. I know annoyance is not the same as feeling hurt but that situation (e.g. minding when someone says "I'm good" where one would prefer them to say "I'm fine") has a similarity, at least in my mind. It seems to me to be a case of getting worked up to a greater or lesser extent over something that isn't really important. (No, I am not saying religion isn't important to the people to whom it is important).

Buchan saying the words he said in the situation described was not an attack on anyone's faith or anyone's deep feelings about god. It was simply an awed outburst with reference only to him. He was expressing his emotion, his feeling of awe, not trashing someone else's strong feelings about something entirely different.

If someone feels that their religion or god is "trashed" by what Buchan said (I'd hazard a bet he wasn't thinking of religion or god, though he might have been for all I know), then really I feel truly sorry for them, not in a patronising way, just a baffled way that something they hold so dear is so apparently fragile and vulnerable.

I do not live in a world where human sensitivities have been trashed. Quite the reverse. I live in a world that I believe is becoming more tolerant and more sensitive to the important things in life. It saddens me to think that some people are not experiencing that and feel so negative about the world.

As an atheist, if I were to say "Oh god!" in a fraught situation, would I be insulting someone's god? Or would I just be having a fraught outburst and using an expression people (including people who believe in gods) use quite frequently?

(I don't say it, by the way; the question is for argument's sake).

You sure you're not making too much of this Bags?

let's all agree to say fuck me, and shut up about it.

So, yeah, if people truly think that Buchan was trashing their religion or their faith, then I truly think that they are being ridiculously self-centred, and... well... heaven help them!

I prefer heaven help them but I agree with the sentiment expressed, jings. Cheers, pal

It would be lovely to live in the world of which you speak bags but it seems to be far from the one we hear of all the time.

Jesus, Mary mother of God! There's so much complaining going on, I'm with the heavens help us brigade.

It was a wildlife programme about a family of wolves for ffs.

That was a lovely programme about tiger conservation on BBC. A nice change from wolves!

Just a wee thought, wonder if some people labour the point to exhaustion and beyond ??
[tchconfusion]

Which point, nonu? The one about feeling offended all the bloody time?

G'night folks! Sweet dreams.

I wish I hadn't missed that wildlife programme. Both of them.