Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Nanny Bans Photos

Nanny Bans Photos
In Nanny's world we are all equal.

However, owing to Nanny's dislike of what she perceives to be "unfair" advantages (eg sex, age, looks, race, religion, class, education etc), Nanny tries to skew the rules in order to ensure that some are more equal than others.

Rather Orwellian wouldn't you say?

This habit of Nanny's, to try to distort (sorry "level") the playing field, ignores a fundamental principle of genetic and social evolution; namely, we are all different and gifted with our own specific sets of good/bad attributes which affect the way that we interact with others and how others perceive us.

That's life, get over it!

Anyhoo, Nanny takes her rule bending to some extraordinarily silly lengths at times; I wonder if she ever stops to think how ridiculous she appears?

No, of course she doesn't.

However, I digress, one recent example of Nanny's obsession with the unattainable goal of "equality" was aptly demonstrated by her lackeys in the University and College Union (UCU).

UCU recently held an election, for the UCU general secretary, members of its board of trustees and special committees. However, the officials of UCU became worried that voters may be influenced by a candidate's looks (for good or bad).

Can you guess what happened next?

Yes, that's right, UCU banned the 100 candidates from including their photos with the official details of their policies etc.

Kate Heasman, UCU equality officer (why do we need jobs such as this?), said:

"Photos are a distraction and we should

not be basing decisions on how people look
."

Herein lies the problem, Nanny doesn't get that there is a world of difference between what we "should do" and the real world where what we "actually do" rules.

Needless to say some members believe that this policy is utter bollocks.

Fawzi Ibrahim, a lecturer at the College of North London, said that UCU is "out of touch with reality".

Much like the Neo Cons in the US, Nanny lives in a make believe world where her view of the world and her rules dominate; conveniently ignoring the actuality of human interaction (for good or bad).

10 comments:

  1. Anonymous9:25 AM

    Of course this is entirely in keeping with nanny's idea of democracy. Heaven forbid that people be able to recognise their elected representatives - they may actually have to talk to the hoi polloi if said plebs know what they look like!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous9:28 AM

    So people are elected on their looks? Considering the attractiveness of the average MP, I dread to think what their opponents looked like! Any anything less attractive than John Prescott really doesn't bear thinking about....

    ReplyDelete
  3. What have Neo Cons got to do with it? You've lost me there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lord of Atlantis3:23 PM

    If Nanny is so against photographs, could you explain why most town and city centres are bristling with cctv cameras?

    ReplyDelete
  5. There's a lovely photo of young Tony on my site!

    ReplyDelete
  6. also not sure what the neocons have to do with this.

    by definition, a neocon is someone who has changed his views, when his former views could not be reconciled with reality.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Simon the horrible1:57 AM

    Ken,

    Neo-con is the leftie code word for JEW.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Simon...not in my book it's not!

    Nanny/Bliary Poppins dragged us into the disaster of Iraq (with the desire to imprint her view of a "democratic" society onto a foreign country) by following W, who himself was persuaded into it by the neo cons.

    Bolton on Newsnight the other week made me wretch. His excuse for the failure of Iraq is that the plan is brilliant, but the execution poor...and it is not the US's gift to determine how Iraq should settle its internal issues.

    eg federal, split or one country makes no difference to the neo cons.

    Fine, except that it is the enforced regime chage that has caused the collapse of Iraq. Also, as long as the occuptaion forces are there the Iraqis will not be able to determine their own future; as the country is tearing itself apart and acting as a beacon for every psycho path in the Middle East.

    When asked at what point he would admit that it was a disaster and that the troops should be pulled out, he complained that the questioning was hostile/biased and didn't answer.

    I used the article to vent my spleen...my indulgence:)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous12:51 AM

    Ken,

    Thanks for your comment.

    I have to agree with you about the complete screw-up this whole Iraq thing has turned into.

    Unfortunately, it has now come down to the fact that the Yanks can't stay and they can't leave.
    You Great Brits have been dragged into this thing, also.

    So where do we go from here?

    I'm sure you will agree with me that throwing Saddam out was not a bad thing.

    I think its a matter of making the best of a bunch of bad choices.

    It is a huge screw-up, but that being said, we have to look after our own best interests first.

    At least the barbarians are over there fighting us and not over here, blowing up subways and buses....

    Oh, damn...

    Regards,

    Simon.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Never mind the nanny state.
    I want to know how Mr.Frost got hold of my passport photo at the top of this article.

    ReplyDelete