millwall32

I know that last time there was an Alex Higgins thread it turned into a rant fest. So this is more general question, which I suspect will get very few answers-Aren't there a ton of sick and dying snooker players Joe O'Boye, the Francisco's, etc . Suspect this will prove to be a thread to nothing but.......?

Hey! Why not post all your info about lower league football here and take a liitle pressure off the Richard O'Sullivan thread. You will also be doing the forum as a whole a favour by keeping the aforesaid Dickie O thread on topic. You needn't even post about death or bad health. Just keep wittering on about Tottenham Wednedsay and Oldham Rovers for post after post after post and let the rest of us get on with predicting and disscussing the deaths of celeberities. You've done it before. Why not do it some more. You know it makes sense. Whadayasay?

They've had a bit of bad luck with drummers . Their first big line-up change involved a drummer flying through the windscreen near Scratchwood Services.

There's another forum which I'm banned from that has several very long threads about Graham Linehan. Trans Mania: Graham Linehan is an Obsessive Transphobe (cookdandbombd.co.uk) (Note Deathlist admins: I got banned from it for using the word "retarded". Not even for calling someone retarded, but for using the word "retarded'". It's a very PC/woke space.) I've had a bit of free time in the last few days and I went through most of the Graham Linehan threads on there and listened to the audiobook of his autobiography on a plane. I wondered what people on here thought of the whole "Graham Linehan Trans Row". I can't decide between his own self image (defender of women's rights who's also bravely raising and publicising severe abuse of children) and the more critical view of him (basically raging transphobe/ homophobe who's literally gone insane over the subject and is a severely nasty piece of work.) Having listened to his story from his point of view in a bit more depth I'm still totally undecided. Do Deathlisters have any thoughts on him?

I've learned quite a lot about the concept of "less is more" by reading his book.

Anita Bryant is an interesting example. As far as I can tell she was/is simply "anti-gay". IIRC, the original stance on Gay Rights which made her famous was that she wanted to repeal a law that outlawed discriminating against gays in employment . recruiting . Or to put it another way, she wanted to make it legal to not recruit people for being gay. I don't think Linehan is saying anything similar. He's not saying it should be illegal to transition, or that transitioning is wrong per se. In an odd way his position on the trans issue is more nuanced and tolerant than Bryant's on Gay Rights. And I'd agree that they both have the odd salient point mixed in with everything else. Maybe the key difference in presentation is that while Bryant was widely despised and mocked she always came across as a slightly dotty aunt; Linehan comes across as an obsessive who's fighting individuals. NB- Do we know anything about Bryant's current health for the main List. All IO can find is that she's 84, and seems to be running a ministry in Oaklahoma.

Having said all that, I'm more interested in what others think. Any thoughts DL'ers??

I've just got to the end of his book and I have a couple of conclusions, good and bad. 1) Great comedy writer. If you look at the thread on Cook's and Bomb'd , link above, there's a very obvious feeling of those who wrongly consider themselves to be comedy talents kicking a man when he's down. (Or perhaps, more accurately, kicking a man when he's too mentally distracted to fight back.) 2) He's obsessive. I can't think of any autobiography I've ever read that focusses so much on one topic that isn't strictly related to the reason the subject is famous. For example, if you read a celebrity "recovery memoir", you won't find that 80% of it is related to AA meetings, drug dealers, and *other people's* drug use. Linehan's story is around 4/5 related to the trans issue. He's allowed himself to become solely associated with it. Maybe he thought that he'd get more support or be able to parle it into a positive career branch. That won't happen since he's come to be seen as obsessed with trans rather than informed about it. 3) He has no presentation skills on the Trans issue. He shares the truly horrifying stories: men being allowed into women's prisons and women's spaces, abuse of children, blackmail, online abuse etc. But tends to come across as angry and nothing else. I think the key is that there's not a single constructive suggestion anywhere about what to do for trans people in legal or legislative terms. One of those, anywhere, would change the whole tone. Maybe this comes from the fact he's a writer. They're not supposed to be emotionally intelligent in the real world, only in abstract. 4) He's too reactive. If you're in an online argument about an issue you should never allow yourself to get personal while criticising the other party. This is the exact stage at which you've lost the argument and they've won on presentation grounds. You are, in effect, drowning your own argument out. This is doubly so if you are wholly or in part in the right. And from time to time, he is in the right. I'm far from being a media expert, but I'd say he'd be far better off sharing the evidence of the shocking stories he's come across and then *not* commenting on them further. Let others do their own working out so that he doesn't come across as haranguing on the issue. NB- I'm in the States at the moment. Los Angeles to be precise. I had a coffee with a trans friend yesterday, asked them if they'd ever heard of Graham Linehan and they hadn't. So maybe the ultimate irony here is that there's been no "cut through" in media terms.

Sure, maybe. But what exactly are you saying makes him an arsehole? I definitely see objective evidence of him being obsessive. Mind you, are you saying that the sheer level of obsession makes him an areshole?

That's one of the elements that confuses me : "obsessed with genitals". It does seem to have become an obsession for him. Having said that, I can't see much that he's saying which isn't factual. Even if his "spin' on the facts may be extreme. It may be one of the oldest problems for anyone discussing any subject- "It's not what you're saying, it's *how* you're saying it."

He's been dead 44 years. He won't say much at all. Out of interest, why do you go straight to "divorcee" ?

Well, if you can see anything uncordial in what I've written point it out to me and I'll change it. Genuine question, sincerely asked.

More like Sven-Göran Deadikson..... ( I'm putting in an early claim for that on thw day he goes.)

Doesn't he go by she nowadays?

It's a very generous employer who will give you the day off work because your mother has been diagnosed with something. What do they do if she actually dies?

He looks fucking amazing for 100. What type of moisturiser does he use?

@La Faucheuse I'm sorry if I'm being dumb here. Help me understand once and for all. To qualify for this particular Death List the criteria are that you have to be a) French and/or b) Francophone and/or c) Have had "an impact in France'. Not merely performed in France, or be famous in France, but have your main or ongoing source of fame be *in France*. Have I understood correctly?

I'm still somewhat confused by the idea of someone being a "Francophone celebrity" making them eligible for your list. Petula Clark gets on the list despite - as far as we know- not being French, but because she is famous in France and speaks French. Eddie Izzard performs in French and speaks French. Would she be eligible? Eddie Izzard Stripped Tout en Français! (youtube.com)

I see what you're saying. So , for example, could Bob Dylan be on your list on the grounds that he was given the Legion d'Honneur in 2013? Or Woody Allen on the grounds that he's conducted TV interviews in French?

Do you really find it pedantic to point out that someone on a French Deathlist might not be French?

I tend to agree. But all this could be solved by finding out if Petula Clark is actually French/ has joint citizenship. I've had a hunt around and I can't find out. It would be a shame to invalidate all @La Faucheuse's hard work on a point of accuracy. But we don't want to be sloppy with facts either.

Then , technically, should she still be on your otherwise excellent list?

It's a very impressive and well-researched list. list. I'm particularly engaged by the fact you've got so many hits so early in the year. One question: are you entirely sure that Number 41 Petula Clark has taken French citizenship? (I know that she's lived there for decades, but is she fully naturalised?)

Not smiling when someone is taking your birthday photo is incredibly bad manners.