[crag(948,"Lime Kiln Quarry (Wirksworth)"With lots of time I’m my hands at the moment, I have been perusing my guides, including the excellent Peak District South edition. Looking at Lime Kiln Quarry currently and climbers are encouraged to drink at the pub in whose car park the crag is situated. It seems particularly apposite at this time to mention that last time I visited , a football match was on and the amount of racist abuse from the regulars was sickening e.g. ‘A’int no black in the Union Jack’. I wanted to call the Police, but as a local person, felt too worried.
if you like this attitude with your post climb pint, fine, if not avoid this place.
It’s upset me for a while now.
That’s shit. Haven’t heard that horrendous refrain since the 80s!
Particularly with the licencee laughing at it behind the bar.
I've added a suitable comment to CAMRA website. You may want to add yours. I will not be frequenting this place.
Go to the Black's Head instead. For a more nuanced debate on racism. Is the old sign still up?
It's just the text these days...
Thanks for sharing that. I am also local to Wirksworth area (have never been into the Blacks head due to the name)
I have gone to the Royal Oak and the Featherstar - both are nice pubs and seem welcoming to all - including non whites.
I have been into the Lime Kiln, but only when events have been on and not noticed a hostile racist vibe, but will now avoid.
(As a Derbyshire resident I am gutted, but not surprised by the recent happenings in Ashbourne - https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/what-really-happened-controversial-wooden-4207333. I have felt a much worse "vibe" in Ashbourne than in Wirksworth)
Wirksworth has always been a town of two halves, brown rice eaters and trogladytes.
The blacks head is welcoming to all too from my experience and doesn't need to be avoided. Derbyshire definitely can breed a strange set of folk, I remember when I was at school in Matlock kids chanting "I'd rather be a paki than a Jew" outside Nigel's tuck shop. A kid had just moved to Matlock from London and was completely perplexed by this stuff.
Derbyshire is great and the centre of the universe but there are a few hill billies with some regressive ideas kicking about.
if you want a pint after climbing in the Wirksworth area I’d recommend the Royal Oak, Feather Star or the Rising Sun at Middleton (handy for Intake Quarry).
Yeah this pish got directed at an Indian friend in the middle of Kendal a few years back. Thankfully she's not exactly shy so he got a mouthful of thick Boltonan back aimed at his rather grotesque girth.
If you are too frightened to contact the police why not get an organisation to do it on your behalf.
Another vote for the Featherstar, if you like crafty beers.
Other decent options nearby are The Malt Shovel and The Barley Mow.
We've had no problems at The Blacks Head either.
Not impressive, but I have to live here...
I see they don't have Jaipur on their list.....
Firstly, please don't let it upset you, because it's not worth it. You can't change some people. Best just to walk away and never go back. I pity the landlord, as he probably feels the pressure of having to tolerate those idiots and his living means it;s easier to tolerate them. Also, no matter what happens you can't change opinions of people like that. In a free country they're entitled to be and act like that and at least by their actions you know exactly what they're like. If you think about it, restricting their free speech will only drive it underground and gain more support. Best avoid the tw@ts.
That's why the landlord laughed. I don't feel sorry for him at all. It's his pub and he sets the tone.
Why are you undermining what happened and pretending it isn't the landlords fault?
Why are you suggesting it is their right to be racist? Hate speech isn't free speech.
This is a free country and people have the legal right to service without discrimination.
Telling him not to let it upset him makes it seem wrong that he is upset. He has every right to be upset. They are the problem.
> I pity the landlord, as he probably feels the pressure of having to tolerate those idiots and his living means it;s easier to tolerate them.
I very much doubt it. Landlords are very capable of setting the tone. Tolerating behaviour like this is a very definite statement.
> In a free country they're entitled to be and act like that
No, no they're not.
> Hi jaipur,
> In a free country they're entitled to be and act like that
What mental world do you live in?
I live, hopefully in a World where free speech is accepted. I have made myself clear that I detest the racists that were talking in that pub. However, I feel that free speech is the most important thing that we in Great Britain have. Take that away and how far does it go?
North Korea doesn't allow free speech. Is that acceptable? How far do we go? As someone once said, " I might not like what they say, but I would fight for their right to say it."
I don't appreciate your use of the word mental, as a lot of people suffering from mental health issues would find it offensive, myself included.
I wish you well and hope you keep safe. It's ok to disagree and discuss.
> However, I feel that free speech is the most important thing that we in Great Britain have.
I'd choose, like, food and water and shelter probably.
I tell you what, I'll live without free speech for a bit and you live without food. Let's see who wins?
I actually agree free speech is really important but the most important thing?
No one is suggesting taking away freedom of speech, hate speech is already illegal in this country. Are you really unaware of this?
As someone who has had struggles with mental health myself, may I say it’s quite funny that you would fight for the non existent rights of some knob in a pub to be completely utterly racist, but claim offence that someone asks which mental world you live in.
Yes, I am aware, but I do worry that the free speech thing will escalate. Things have a tendency to go full circle, like politics.
just think for one moment, if a right wing party took over government and told you what you were not allowed to say. Would that be acceptable? If you were not allowed to fight for Black Lives Matter because you weren't allowed to say what you wanted. Think before you ban free speech.
i am aware, but by what people are suggesting it is removing freedom of speech. As I mentioned, and I'll quote it again, "I might not like what they say, but I would fight for their right to say it.
I hate the racist b@sards, just like you do, but we obviously have different o[pinions on free speech. I'm not going to be aggressive in this argument, but I do hope that you can understand my opinion, just like I respect yours. We both have a common aim,
I'm not banning free speech.
But it's certainly not the MOST important, which was your statement.
I agree, it;s not the most important thing. The quality of peoples lives is most important.
If I shout that I’m going to kill my neighbour so loudly they hear me, then I’m going to get arrested. So, no free speech there. Does using racist language in a pub carry the same threat of violence?
I think marsbar is correct, from a legal point of view, earlier up thread. Users of the pub have a legal right (Equality Act 2010) not to be discriminated against and the landlord of the pub would be doing exactly that by allowing the behaviour. However, unless somebody who was the target of the chanting was actually at the pub at the time it wouldn't apply because you can't 'treat a person less favourably', as the Act demands, if they're not there. If the OP could be considered such a 'target' (sorry, I can't tell from this thread) then he's surely been discriminated against by the Landlord who has every right to throw the oiks out.
As to whether 'hate speech' is of itself illegal from the point of view of the oiks, I'm not aware of a law that says simply 'you can't say that'. There is the Public Order Act 1986 which makes it an offence under section 5 to use 'threatening or abusive' words or behaviour, or section 4A which makes it an offence to use threatening abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to cause harassment alarm or distress (i.e. it has to be directed towards someone).
Note though that there has to be an identifiable victim, even if (for section 5) it's someone nearby likely to be affected by being caused harassment, alarm or distress' [so the OP would qualify?] . Also, whilst there are specific 'racially aggravated' forms of the above offences, they still require a victim in the same way.
Then there's section 18 of the Act which prohibits the use of 'threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour...' intending to stir up racial hatred, (or having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby). The prosecution would have to prove that to the criminal standard of course, as with any prosecution.
There is no law saying 'no racist chanting' except at football matches (they being such fine events that a specific law was required to tackle it). Perhaps this law should be of general application and not confined only to football?
As it is, I wonder what the police would have arrested people for? Maybe a word with the licensing authorities would be in order?
So there are clear limits on 'free speech', it's a matter of degree as always. Those are my brief thoughts on the law anyway FWIW...
I'm afraid you don't live in a country with the absolute right to free speech. There are quite a few things you can't say without running the risk of being arrested.
To use Oliver Wendell Holmes' example, you can't falsely cry 'fire!' in a crowded theatre. I think few would argue that you should be allowed to do that.
Once we've agreed that one example of speech should not be free, then all that's left to argue about is where the line is drawn.
The Ashbourne students who wandered round desperately trying to find something"racist" to destroy do remind me of the yokels who once hanged an animal thinking they'd found a "Napoleonic Spy".
If you're referring to the Hartlepool monkey , the local council seems to treat it as a myth . But I suppose they would.
As an aside, I find the chant “ black lives matter” rather offensive. I think that all lives matter.
For the love of god, haven't we done that one to death yet?
Ffs where have you been?
Running alongside a breast cancer fundraiser shouting "all cancers matter"?
Maybe you could go to a hospital and yell "my health matters" at the intensive care nurses.
Let's take a short cut and imagine that it says "Black lives matter too". I assume that's less offensive to you and it should save you a ton of scorn and trouble further down the page . But nothing's guaranteed.
Just to get it off my chest. I was climbing at malham a couple of years ago and the guy climbing next to me shouted:
"I'm climbing like a f..... g inbred Paki' spastic".
I was stunned.
Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you want. What the OP described was incitement of racial hatred, which is a criminal offense.
Please let us not toe The USA's line where an idea of 'freedom of speech' is used as an excuse to spout whatever racist f*cking drivel you want. Freedom of speech should be used as a way to report and combat injustice, not create it.
> The Ashbourne students who wandered round desperately trying to find something"racist" to destroy do remind me of the yokels who once hanged an animal thinking they'd found a "Napoleonic Spy".
My daughter was one of the protagonists - I can assure you that they are not snowflakes/ easily offended - they've been castigated by some of their friends and most of the town for the stand they took and they knew what they were in for when they went into it.
A 'golliwog's head on a gallows' - not a great look; I'm glad it's been taken down.
Please give your daughter my thanks and best wishes. It is a quite awful depiction and it belongs in a museum not in a town centre.
Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you and disappear; my girlfriend was visiting for the past week and it's the first time that I've seen her in three months. The laptop remained switched off throughout
Free speech is not an absolute right, and nor should it ever be. It's no different to fundamentalist clerics inciting violence against those of a certain nationality, and it's no different to oddballs hurling sexist or violent abuse at women in the street. They're all wrong – morally if not legally – and we have a moral obligation to challenge such behaviour wherever it occurs – whether that be directly, or by refusing to tolerate that behaviour in our establishment as a landlord, or by taking our custom elsewhere as a customer.
You've totally misunderstood the idea of free speech if you're under the impression that it's a good idea to protect the "right" to racist chanting in a pub.
The idea that "free speech" is
a) More important than anything else, including the right not be subjected to racist chanting; and
b) Under threat
Is just a popular internet meme. A more accurate analysis of the facts in the world that lead people to say "free speech is under threat" is that it has become a violation of social norms to openly express racism, homophobia etc. When you violate social norms, you bear the brunt of social sanctions. The meme is that these social sanctions are somehow a violation of rights - they aren't.
You're mistaken to think that if a bunch of people are chanting in a pub, then the answer is some kind of dialogue. A black person on their own doesn't have any means of putting forward their counter view - they're just being abused by a mob, and it's unacceptable and I presume is (quite rightly) illegal.
Well done to your daughter and the other people involved in protesting about the image. I am sure it was not easy. I certainly found the head offensive.
It's heartening to see that most people have supported Jaipur in calling out racist behaviour.
my understanding was that it was a celebration of a turkish trader who bought great prosperity to the town and the head was placed in his honour?
Still, Removal was the best option regardless of what it was there for, it should be stored away for historical purposes in the warehouse with Indiana’s ark.
I've heard that story, and the one about the little boy. Personally I don't believe either. The name of the original pub was the black moors head, (black moor referring to black muslims from northern Africa) and the head is a caricature of a black adult male. It would have been called the Turks head or the black boy if either of those stories were true.
that’s a far more palatable explanation that the one I referred to which came from the bbc
I kind a local too, next big town in the matlock triangle, i’m in belper
Wales will soon start re-opening to outdoor activities, but fear in local communities persists, and it will not be business as usual. What can climbers and walkers do to ensure they're not part of the problem? Snowdonia resident Mark Reeves looks...