Miriam Margoleys

I agree with you doodledog. I’m not really a fan of anyone, man or woman, using foul language or lewd behaviour in order to get attention. That’s on television or in real life. I don’t watch her any longer. If I see she’s on I avoid. I’ve seen enough of her in the past.

Les Patterson aka Dame Edna Everidge not my cup of tea.

Saw him live many years ago, only pleased I didn’t have to pay for the ticket, two and a half hours out of my life I can never get back.

I loved dame Edna.
(Sir Les, not so much)

Swearing is part of everyday life whether one likes it or not. Bernard Levin broke the duck on TV many years ago and I don't see why Radio is any different.

Sir Les Patterson? -nice side track there Volver dear.???

Look, if you can't follow the argument just say so. We'll understand.

He was Australian as well.

Mollygo

Sir Les Patterson? -nice side track there Volver dear.???

Just to say - he's not a real person

???

Callistemon21

Mollygo
Sir Les Patterson? -nice side track there Volver dear.???
Just to say - he's not a real person

???
Yes I know.

I know you know Mollygo
???

Wait. What? He's not real?? ?

Oh, my whole life is undermined! How could I have been so misled? ??

So irrelevant.

At the risk of repeating myself ...

Look, if you can't follow the argument just say so. We'll understand.

?

The argument is whether a man behaving like MM would be treated like a dirty monster for mentioning what goes on inside his pants and details of his sexual encounters.

I went “silent” as you put it Chestnut because posts were becoming so repetitive. Much more interesting is volver’s insightful post at 12.27 about power in our sexist society, and one with which I completely agree.

He is a construct, so not particularly relevant. When he is in performance he's quite funny, but I can't say I've come across him for years.

I'm not saying that MM is offensive, a point which I think you may be missing - I'm saying that I don't particularly like her public persona (I don't know if that is her 'real' one or not).

Chestnut

The argument is whether a man behaving like MM would be treated like a dirty monster for mentioning what goes on inside his pants and details of his sexual encounters.

So based on that argument, does that mean many posters on here think it would be acceptable for a man of any persuasion or dress to do what she does?
Just wondering.

I don't find it particularly abhorrent.

It's a lot less unpleasant than, say, 'Naked Attraction', where men and women not only talk about what's in their pants, we get to see, should we choose to.

I find some of the things said in gransnet far more unpleasant, at times, and overall, far more damaging.
All the "worthy poor", blah blah blah, "Ooh, you're not like me and my privately educated family... blah blah blah"
"Oh, your parents must be uneducated because you don't know a parsing verb from a parsnip".
"People on benefits have the latest iPhones and acrylic nails"

I think opinions of that sort undermine cohesion in society, rather than a pensioners pants.

Post of the day. ???

I agree with Chesnut! A thoroughly obnoxious old bag!

Grantanow

Swearing is part of everyday life whether one likes it or not. Bernard Levin broke the duck on TV many years ago and I don't see why Radio is any different.

Kenneth Tynan was the first person to swear on tv.

MissA ?

As Miriam said, she feels a fart brings people together.

Well I often disagree with Chestnut but I've never felt the need to address her like that...

Ooh, you're not like me and my privately educated family ...

Or privately educated Miriam either ?