Phoebe fucking Bridgers

[tarw]

1 hour ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Not worth it with the current flight fights.

Was sizing up whether I'm mad enough to fly Orlando in the new year to catch Springsteen. The answer is sadly not.

Just looked at this and it looks as though you need a US or Canadian photo number to register to buy tickets! Anyone have any idea about a way round this?

[panda97]

Managed to get a ticket today through twickets finally

Bit confused as it says stalls standing which indicates downstairs, but also circle only which is upstairs

Oh well, either will be fine, never been upstairs but usually hang around near the back at Brixton anyway

Just glad I managed to get my hands on a ticket!

[tarw]

If anyone has spare tickets for Manchester please drop me a dm.

I was on shift when she played the JP and could faintly hear her to add to my frustration.

[mjfiddy]

Got 1 spare ticket for the delightful Phoebe at Brixton this Friday if there are any takers before I list on ticket sites

standing - £40 

can mobile transfer it right away 
 

edit - now sold 

Edited July 25, 2022 by mjfiddy

[About Today]

Might have a spare ticket for tonight at Brixton. Friend is undecided whether to come or not.

[sisco]

She’s making her feelings known about The Queen

[The Martini Police]

16 minutes ago, sisco said:

She’s making her feelings known about The Queen

I'm anti-monarchy and a big Phoebe fan but her post is awful. 

Edited September 9, 2022 by The Martini Police

[FloorFiller]

Clearly Paul has been rubbing off on her. 

[Suprefan]

14 hours ago, The Martini Police said:

I'm anti-monarchy and a big Phoebe fan but her post is awful. 

Its not just about what happens to the queens corgis ya know. Some people want to remind others of the rest. 

Edited September 10, 2022 by Suprefan

[tarw]

51 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

Its not just about what happens to the queens corgis ya know. Some people want to remind others of the rest. 

That would be fair enough if the queen had been responsible for the war crimes. The government make the decisions not the monarchy. 
I’m a staunchly anti monarchy but to accuse them of something they are not responsible for weakens your argument 

[Suprefan]

10 hours ago, tarw said:

That would be fair enough if the queen had been responsible for the war crimes. The government make the decisions not the monarchy. 
I’m a staunchly anti monarchy but to accuse them of something they are not responsible for weakens your argument 

I guess being reminded of your own history is always a sore spot. The queen isnt a war criminal, she just had her own constituents pull the trigger instead.

[Spindles]

I'm about as far from a royalist as can be (I'm a republican) but I don't think it is a fair accusation.  I mean, which wars that occurred during her reign are we referring to here?  The Falklands?  Iraq?  The crown hasn't been responsible for a war in at least a century if not longer.  Might as well blame Basil Brush.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure her heart is in the right place, but the queen as a ceremonial figure isn't really someone I'd hold responsible for wars during her reign.  The politicians however....

[Matt42]

I’m indifferent to the monarchy but I have found these past few days sad. More because it’s the end of an era and idk the world we are in / going into just feels so unfamiliar at the moment. Is anyone else feeling the same? Just feels like the world now is becoming unrecognisable from only 5 years ago.

Anyway. I don’t agree with how she’s played this. But I guess everyone is entitled to freedom of speech.

[gfa]

On 9/9/2022 at 3:56 PM, sisco said:

She’s making her feelings known about The Queen

What did she post? all gone now guessing it was on her story

[FloorFiller]

3 minutes ago, gfa said:

What did she post? all gone now guessing it was on her story

 

[gfa]

1 hour ago, FloorFiller said:

 

Fair, found a daily mail article on it - comments were a fun read (adblocker firmly on may i add)

[NorthernSoul52]

Freedom of speech and all that.

Humanity - and the individuals that make it up - can be so contradictory, but that is why we love and live. (And hate, I guess, but that sounds miserable.)

[The Martini Police]

Nobody is saying she shouldn't be able to say it. It's just that what she said is ridiculous for the reasons outlined. Floorfiller might have a good point too.

On 9/10/2022 at 6:46 AM, Suprefan said:

Its not just about what happens to the queens corgis ya know. Some people want to remind others of the rest. 

As it happens, I did see this morning that Prince Andrew will be looking after them. Make of that what you will. 

[GeezLouise]

On 9/10/2022 at 7:52 PM, Spindles said:

I'm about as far from a royalist as can be (I'm a republican) but I don't think it is a fair accusation.  I mean, which wars that occurred during her reign are we referring to here?  The Falklands?  Iraq?  The crown hasn't been responsible for a war in at least a century if not longer.  Might as well blame Basil Brush.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure her heart is in the right place, but the queen as a ceremonial figure isn't really someone I'd hold responsible for wars during her reign.  The politicians however....

Basil Brush, War Master - emphasis on the BOOM BOOM. 

[incident]

2 hours ago, Erazed Citizen said:

 

Atrocities happened while she was on the throne, Phoebe Bridger's repost was quite restrained if we're being honest. It's like saying Tony Blair isn't responsible for anything that happened in Iraq because he sent other people to do it.

It's not, though. That analogy fundamentally fails to understand how the governmental system works in the UK. There's no doubt that the country has done some hugely shitty things - but blame needs to be placed in the correct places. The monarchy, for a long time now, has been a purely ceremonial role with no actual power to prevent the elected Government from doing anything.

I'm not a royalist, but we should have these conversations based on facts if they're to be taken seriously. To spout obvious and easily disproven bullshit as though the monarch has secretly been calling the shots is both counter productive and takes blame away from where it's deserved. It ends up coming across like the QAnon nutjobs in America.

Now, if you want to talk about things the monarchy can actually do something about, like land ownership, then there's a conversation to be had there that we can probably agree on.

Edited September 12, 2022 by incident

[reflekting]

2 minutes ago, Erazed Citizen said:

She was the head of state, she represents this country and her wealth comes from colonial looting of other countries. You don't have the right to tell people affected by this that they can't be angry.

Yep, this is a fair point but Phoebe isn't from colonised Africa. She isn't entitled to be the voice on their behalf. 

[incident]

4 minutes ago, Erazed Citizen said:

She was the head of state, she represents this country and her wealth comes from colonial looting of other countries. You don't have the right to tell people affected by this that they can't be angry.

In terms of historically ill gotten gains? Absolutely. The monarchy should and could have done something to try and recompense for that. Still should under Charles. No argument there.

But you're absolutely moving the goalposts with that. My response to you was about blaming the Queen for political actions of the last 70 years - which clearly isn't something she had any influence over.

[jparx]

To be honest, my belief has always been if you’re going to accept the privilege of being an unelected head of state, you also have to accept the criticism of actions your country takes regardless of whether you directly ordered them. You can’t accept a life of immense privilege, wealth and security but wash your hands of what the country does during your reign. That’s having your cake and eating it. You have to share in that blame.

[Superscally]

7 hours ago, jparx said:

To be honest, my belief has always been if you’re going to accept the privilege of being an unelected head of state, you also have to accept the criticism of actions your country takes regardless of whether you directly ordered them. You can’t accept a life of immense privilege, wealth and security but wash your hands of what the country does during your reign. That’s having your cake and eating it. You have to share in that blame.

She may very well. It's not in her role to either apportion or refute blame, admit fault, or apologise for any actions that occurred under her reign as she has to remain politically neutral at all times.

It is clear that she has a strong sense of responsibility for things that happen outwith of her monarchy, as seen for apologies to both the Maori people and a more guarded one (given the proximity/continuity) to the Republic or Ireland. It's entirely feasible that she harbours immense sadness over many incidents/eras from 1953 in, but they were neither instigated by her, nor able to be altered so to harbour any genuine ill will to her is either misguided, or a negative testament to the person wishing that upon her. 

To say she must share in that blame despite being utterly powerless to shape the outcome is unfair and wrong, as it would be for anyone in a similar situation. 

Is the mother or father of a murderer automatically to blame for the crime too? 

[MaxPower]

13 hours ago, jparx said:

To be honest, my belief has always been if you’re going to accept the privilege of being an unelected head of state, you also have to accept the criticism of actions your country takes regardless of whether you directly ordered them. You can’t accept a life of immense privilege, wealth and security but wash your hands of what the country does during your reign. That’s having your cake and eating it. You have to share in that blame.

100%. It doesn’t matter that the monarchy hasn’t been making substantial political decisions for most of Elizabeth’s reign, the monarchy is still responsible for being the soft power involved in the actions of the state.