Another example of someone being cancelled

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65071989

for showing a picture of Michelangelo’s David

apparently too “controversial” and “pornographic” for primary school kids

bloody libs…wait, hang on…

Davos m8, just as I called out others when they accused you of this and called Chill such things I don’t think “paedo” is an insult to be thrown around lightly. Stick to the usuals which you do very well.

“Davos m8, just as I called out others when they accused you of this and called Chill such things I don’t think “paedo” is an insult to be thrown around lightly. Stick to the usuals which you do very well.”

What about ‘nonce’, Jim? That gets thrown around likewise. 

Genuinely not seen it aimed at Roffers that I recall. The most recent use I remember was aiming it at the bloke from Mermaids comparing cumming on children to shoes. 

And at others, usually who have not been convicted of any offence. Imagine accusing someone, for example, of stalking someone, with no evidence or no conviction. Not very smart. 

"We're not going to show the full statue of David to kindergartners. We're not going to show him to second graders. Showing the entire statue of David is appropriate at some age. We're going to figure out when that is," Mr Bishop said.

What’s controversial about this? 
 

“We're not going to show the full statue of David to kindergartners. We're not going to show him to second graders. Showing the entire statue of David is appropriate at some age. We're going to figure out when that is," Mr Bishop said.”