Disqus - Latest Comments for pould

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Wed, 19 Oct 2022 08:28:00 -0000

I'm very familiar with it and a big fan (but it's not anti-bullying guidance is it?). The issue here isn't whether I do or don't support a conservative perspective, but rather over-interpreting what the CofE guidance is or isn't saying.

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Wed, 19 Oct 2022 03:43:46 -0000

"This 'guidance' enthusiastically normalises a novel set of social
beliefs and behaviours which are fundamentally at odds with God's
creative design and expressed will"

No it doesn't - it simply observes what the cultural landscape is and asks CofE schools to be safe and compassionate spaces where abusing people because of their situation / life choices is a thing of the past.

Again, where does the guidance *endorse* the TRA perspective?

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Tue, 18 Oct 2022 19:33:23 -0000

Nothing in that promotes a pro-trans identity - it simply observes what the situation is in England (a wide range of views) and asks CofE schools to be safe spaces for all.

And I'm assuming you agree with challenging homophobic or other bullying based on the victim's identity (regardless of whether you agree with that identity)?

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Tue, 18 Oct 2022 18:49:56 -0000

I'm still not seeing from you any actual quote from the guidance that supports the contention you make as to what it does or doesn't say.

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Tue, 18 Oct 2022 18:37:15 -0000

Has what guidance been withdrawn? Again, where does the guidance (i) refer to Mermaids, (ii) "reflect... the trans ideology of Mermaids"? The guidance does say that schools should allow primary school age children to explore gender roles etc (dressing up etc) but this is perfectly normal advice. Lots of kids dress up as the opposite sex and this is part of establishing their sex identity (typically young boys dress up as girls in order to then make the point that they are not actually girls). That's far from endorsing a trans identity, just letting kids be kids and develop normally.

Re: Mermaids and safeguarding: why is the Church of England not heeding the evidence?

Peter Ould — Tue, 18 Oct 2022 17:47:23 -0000

"Why is the Church of England content to go on endorsing the services of Mermaids...."

I don't believe this is factually correct. The latest guidance from the CofE Education Team does not include any reference to Mermaids at all.

Re: Sheffield Cathedral sacks choir – because God told them to

Peter Ould — Sun, 26 Jul 2020 08:52:22 -0000

And so can traditional worship. Equally both can lift us to the throne of God.

Re: Sheffield Cathedral sacks choir – because God told them to

Peter Ould — Sun, 26 Jul 2020 08:51:19 -0000

"Tallis to Rutter"

This is the nub of the problem. You've decided true, valid, worthy worship is only to be found in this narrow band. Bye bye Gregorian chant. Bye bye Watts. Bye bye Kendrick and Redman. Bye bye silent contemplation.

To be Anglican is not to sing Stanford in B flat, it is to express worship in the vernacular.

Re: Sheffield Cathedral sacks choir – because God told them to

Peter Ould — Sun, 26 Jul 2020 08:46:51 -0000

You're going to have to be less subtle and just point it out to us

Re: Sheffield Cathedral sacks choir – because God told them to

Peter Ould — Sun, 26 Jul 2020 07:46:18 -0000

Cranmer speaks wisdom.

Go to any CofE Diocese and look to see which are the largest, thriving churches seeing regular new confessions of faith. Chances are the majority are (i) using modern worship and (ii) not at all theologically vapid or woke.

The Dean of Sheffield is doing something brave but profoundly Anglican. He is prepared to go back to first, Cranmerian, principles and ask "why does worship in the vernacular look like in 2020". By its very nature it will look different to 1920, 1820, 1520 or even 120.

Too many of the comments here show either a cultural bias (my preferred style of music is clearly God's preferred style) or an eagerness to tar the Dean of Sheffield with the label of wokeness despite any actual evidence to support.

I have had my most profound worship experiences at both ends of the candle, deep in charismatic worship or full liturgy with all the works (I remember presiding just under four years ago, first Eucharist in my church after the martyrdom of Jacques Hamel - it was a profound moment when I felt touched by the holy army of martyrs). Neither is spiritually superior to the other. All have their place. Some may be more suitable for different situations. Some may be more suitable to reach different kinds of heathen.

I look forward to what comes out of this experiment.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 07:22:58 -0000

Bless you. As I said, you're hiding behind a pseudonym and advocating aggressive responses rather than the path of grace that MLK urged on us.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 06:14:54 -0000

Sorry Mr Hide behind a Pseudonym, I don't get frightened by name calling.

You continue to advocate the path of violence, I'll advocate (like MLK) the path of grace.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:42:18 -0000

This is a fair point and changes slightly the situation.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:10:03 -0000

We're clearly not going to agree. Thank you for sharing your perspective in a calm and rational manner.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 15:15:59 -0000

I completely agree with your last sentence.

On the constitutional issue (amendment number 5 is it?), strictly that is to do with compulsion to bear witness in a court case, not answering questions in a police investigation, and as a foreigner what would I know, but I think that rather misses the point I'm making elsewhere in this thread that simply providing name and room would have altered the dynamics immediately.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:12:44 -0000

I genuinely do not understand how me saying she should make "an official complaint at the blatant racism" is equivalent to "letting it slide".

Racism like this is a form of raw violence - it is the hotel employee using her power to intimidate the black lady (calling the police). It is my experience that just responding in another form of raw violence (digging in heels and refusing to provide any evidence that would prove her position) just exarcebates this raw violence - it simply perpetuates the conflict in a non-resolving manner.

I prefer action that creates meaningful justice. Often however that requires a moment of sacrifice. To give name and room feels like a temporary indignity (and indeed it is, because no-one else is being asked to prove they have the right to be at the pool side) but what it would have done is stripped away any argument the hotel employee had against the black lady. At that point the black lady has the power and she can use it not to perpetuate the violent conflict but rather to seek and achieve justice.

MLK and his fellow strugglers for justice were prepared to time and time again *non-violently* suffer indignity for the sake of justice. We can learn a lot from them. My fear is that if we encourage and justify foms of violence to respond to violence we end up increasing, not decreasing the conflict.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:40:47 -0000

That's actually worrisome.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:40:16 -0000

Yes, I understand this entirely. But you're agreeing with my underlying point - if she had demonstrated calmly she was clearly a resident of the hotel she would have stripped the employee of any power in the situation and that would have strengthened even more her position.

But I completely understand why, when she is asked and the white couple aren't, she would be totally offended. And if I had been the white person there at the poolside I would have got incredibly angry at this blatant racism in front of me.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:37:32 -0000

In the spirit of a graceful and fair minded conversation, why not?

I'm of the opinion that calmly giving her details and then calmly demanding to speak to the duty manager would have been empowering. It would have denuded the employee of any argument and put all the power in the hands of the lady

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:35:59 -0000

I disagree. She was clearly rightly angry with her treatment. She had every right to be offended.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:35:21 -0000

I'm arguing that we should *not* let this slide.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:34:23 -0000

I'm sorry to hear that you've been treated like this at CDG. I don't like that airport at the best of times.

I think I'm being misunderstood so I'll try and clarify. Nothing about the whole situation is acceptable (as I've said repeatedly). All I'm saying (nothing more, nothing less) is that providing her details at the start of the incident would have defused that initial conflict so it wouldn't have resulted in the police being (completely inappropriately) called. I completely understand why she refused to do that and I'm not trying to excuse the behaviour of the employee in any way, I'm simply trying to understand it.

In these situations, even if one is the victim of injustice as this lady clearly is, we choose how we respond. I happen to think that calmly giving name and room number and then calmly asking to speak to the manager would have been very powerful.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 12:26:00 -0000

See my response above.

As it happens, I *would* give my details because it's a really quick way to demonstrate you're in the right, but I completely understand why in the heat of the moment she found that an offensive suggestion.

Let's just look at it from the employee's perspective for a moment - perhaps they had a problem with people picking up room cards to "show" they were guests? That doesn't excuse for one moment the racism in singling out this person *but* it does help us understand why just flashing a room card wasn't perceived by the employee as an acceptable response.

That's why name and room number would have easily resolved the query and then she could have got on with the "why the hell are you asking me but not the white couple" which is the really egregious thing here. And let's be very clear so there is no misunderstanding - the way the woman was treated was offensive and racist and I'm pleased the employee was dealt with appropriately.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 12:21:20 -0000

I think you've misunderstood what I was saying so my bad for not expressing it properly.

The way she was treated was outrageous and seems obviously racist. All I'm saying is that *if* she had said "I am Mrs X and I'm in room YYY" (which seems perfectly reasonable) then that would have calmed down the intial conflict point and then she could have (quite rightly) made an official complaint about the initial assumption by the employee that she, but not the white people there, was absuing the facilities.

So to be clear. Employee accusing her but not the white couple of abusing the facilities = wrong and racist. Calling the police on her = wrong and racist. Refusing to give her name and room number (so as to prove the racism of the employee) = completely understandable given the anger at being treated in this way, but missing an opportunity to quickly defuse the situation.

Re: Black Family Using Hotel Pool Harassed By Hampton Inn By Hilton Employee

Peter Ould — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:22:18 -0000

I agree that this is completely outrageous. At the same time, surely the lady should have just said "I am Mrs X and I'm in room YYY". That would have solved it there and then and *then* she could have (rightly) made an official complaint at the blatant racism.

That said, I get the anger at this. She didn't make the calm rational response, but then she was the victim of racism and one can understand exactly why she reacted as she did.