# Jeremy Clarkson: the relentless wanker



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

He's apparently been involved in a 'fracas' with a producer. 

I can't find a link yet, it's just been on BBC news. [emoji41]


----------



## StoneRoad (Mar 10, 2015)

oh, I'm disappointed.
I thought someone had involved a lamp standard ..................


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31824040

Not much information yet, but Top Gear won't be broadcast this week. No idea what he's done but I'm sure the suspension is richly deserved.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 10, 2015)

I think he was already on a final warning. Ah well, never mind.


----------



## StoneRoad (Mar 10, 2015)

I wonder how the producer is ?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 10, 2015)

They might give his job to Nick Griffin.


----------



## Mogden (Mar 10, 2015)

Heehee is all I can think I to say at the moment.


----------



## Ponyutd (Mar 10, 2015)

Top Gear still on is it. How the fuck are they getting away with that?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2015)

Suspended? By his entrails from Tower bridge? Please make it so.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

note how he slides out from under racist quips but gets suspended after lamping a beeb bod


----------



## fen_boy (Mar 10, 2015)

First John Inverdale and now this, today was a good day.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Mar 10, 2015)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31824040


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 10, 2015)

Hope this isn't the end of Top Gear though


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Mar 10, 2015)

Unless we can get him jailed for a few yrs this is just urban's impotent rage. Even if he was so bad he could never work anywhere ever again he is still worth about £50mill so he could just retire to somewhere nice & warm. Rage without the power to punish is annoying. We should not be beating ourselves up over this.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 10, 2015)

Top Gear is one of the BBC's high earners. They may bring Noel Edmonds back


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

Shame he couldn't have taken Hammond down with him. [emoji20]


----------



## seventh bullet (Mar 10, 2015)

He should be suspended by his neck from something like a lamp post.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 10, 2015)

he sold the prog rights didnt he?

so hes probs an employee now, with non compete in his contract i would think

it is a franchise, they dont need him


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 10, 2015)

Should save the Beeb a few bob.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 10, 2015)

seventh bullet said:


> He should be suspended by his neck from something like a lamp post.



Or a speed camera.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 10, 2015)

What a shame!


----------



## T & P (Mar 10, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Hope this isn't the end of Top Gear though


Doesn't he own the rights to the programme? I'm sure I've seen that claim made on here before anyway.

Sometimes the programme can be enjoyable in spite of Clarkson. But then it'd be very satisfactory to see him kicked out even if it means the end of Top Gear as currently formatted. Cue Clarkson and his chums restarting the programme on Sky or or Channel 5, and its ratings sinking to zero within weeks.

Fuck him.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2015)

Sky 1 is ringing him right now...


----------



## moomoo (Mar 10, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Hope this isn't the end of Top Gear though



Me too. I'll miss perving over Richard.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 10, 2015)

moomoo said:


> Me too. I'll miss perving over Richard.


Seriously?


----------



## moomoo (Mar 10, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Seriously?



Yes.


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

moomoo said:


> Me too. I'll miss perving over Richard.


Oh my god, he's such a fucking weasel. How could you, moomoo. [emoji20]


----------



## moomoo (Mar 10, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> Oh my god, he's such a fucking weasel. How could you, moomoo. [emoji20]



What??? He's lush!!! You leave him alone!!!


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Mar 10, 2015)

moomoo said:


> What??? He's lush!!! You leave him alone!!!



and on that bombshell...


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

He's like a low(er) rent, David Essex. 








[emoji1]


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Mar 10, 2015)

He sold the rights to Top Gear for about £50mill to the Beeb, which is why he is now so rich. I think the other 2 are quietly bitter about the pay differentials between them & Clarkson.


----------



## moomoo (Mar 10, 2015)

Go away. I hate you all.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 10, 2015)

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/top-gear-new-series-2015.331601/#post-13770418



The ghost of pogofish scared me off starting a thread tbh


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> so hes probs an employee now, with non compete in his contract i would think


contract null and void if he's sacked


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

That's a thread about Top Gear. This is dedicated to the immediate issue so ner! I don't want to wade through a thread about Top Gear to call Clarkson a cunt or speculate about his suspension.

Sorry, that was at twentythingy.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 10, 2015)

Perhaps they should get Quentin Wilson back..I always feel a bit sorry for him any time I see him doing a car insurance advert.

(((Quentin)))


----------



## susie12 (Mar 10, 2015)

Good.  About time they got rid of the racist tosser, but I wouldn't be surprised if they let him crawl back.  He makes them so much money.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Mar 10, 2015)

According to the Guinness Book of Records, Top Gear is the most watched factual TV program in the world.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 10, 2015)

moomoo said:


> Me too. I'll miss perving over Richard.


Could you not learn to love one of Snow White's other friends?


----------



## moomoo (Mar 10, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> Could you not learn to love one of Snow White's other friends?



Oi!!! I AM one of Snow White's other friends!!


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 10, 2015)

Top Gear makes gazillions for the bbc. I can't see them letting him go unless it was pretty serious stuff, after all he's survived endless other 'controversies' which have all failed to unseat him or the show's popularity. A cynical person might suggest that he just does this on purpose for ratings.


----------



## susie12 (Mar 10, 2015)

Indeed.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 10, 2015)

Well my first thought is publicity stunt. Top Gear is forever getting in the papers for the wrong reasons. True they don't have advertisers but they do have a franchise to be sold around the globe.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 10, 2015)

They write off super cars, it gets in the papers and nobody blinks.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2015)

If it is a publicity stunt, which would normally imply doing a stunt to get some publicity, why then not show the next episode on Sunday?


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 10, 2015)

skyscraper101 said:


> A cynical person might suggest that he just does this on purpose for ratings.



Not this time, if they're not broadcasting on Sunday.  Pulling the show mid-series suggests it's serious.  Slightly odd time for it to happen, though: they film the studio bits on Wednesday for the following Sunday's show (yes, I've been, a few years ago: I can be seen standing behind James May as he announces the 'car sauna' game  ) so you'd expect incidents with producers to happen then.  Unless they've moved it or it was over something else entirely, of course.

I'd be sorry to see the back of Top Gear.  It's past its best, but this series has been one of the better ones, and it's still one of the few things on TV that can make me laugh out loud.

Fancying Hammond is beyond the pale, though.  How could you, moomoo?!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2015)

skyscraper101 said:


> Top Gear makes gazillions for the bbc. I can't see them letting him go unless it was pretty serious stuff, after all he's survived endless other 'controversies' which have all failed to unseat him or the show's popularity. A cynical person might suggest that he just does this on purpose for ratings.


Where's my cut of this btw?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

I think he was refreshed and lamped a producer

writing off cars is the least of their paper-covered things. You must remember the 'slope' and 'n*gger' controversies


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 10, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> I think he was refreshed and lamped a producer
> 
> writing off cars is the least of their paper-covered things. You must remember the 'slope' and 'n*gger' controversies



And that will have been scripted. It's TV, and he isn't Prince Philip.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 10, 2015)

Perhaps they'll ask Nigel Farage to take his place.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 10, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well my first thought is publicity stunt. Top Gear is forever getting in the papers for the wrong reasons. True they don't have advertisers but they do have a franchise to be sold around the globe.


I could believe that if it were another racial slur against a foreign country or similar, but the way it's being reported "fracas with producer", makes me think it might be genuinely more serious this time. Obviously it depends what the "fracas" was, but if he's gone and decked someone or anything like that, it's not going to be something he can just weasel his way out of.


----------



## Poot (Mar 10, 2015)

A friend on facebook commented that she was pleased it was a fracas rather than a rumpus or a hullabaloo.


----------



## peterkro (Mar 10, 2015)

skyscraper101 said:


> Perhaps they should get Quentin Wilson back..I always feel a bit sorry for him any time I see him doing a car insurance advert.
> 
> (((Quentin)))


If I remember rightly Quentin Wilson got caught in a scam where he was importing vehicles from Japan and rebadging them as more expensive models.Naughty.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

Poot said:


> A friend on facebook commented that she was pleased it was a fracas rather than a rumpus or a hullabaloo.


nor was it a set-to or a frank exchange of views


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> I could believe that if it were another racial slur against a foreign country or similar, but the way it's being reported "fracas with producer", makes me think it might be genuinely more serious this time. Obviously it depends what the "fracas" was, but if he's gone and decked someone or anything like that, it's not going to be something he can just weasel his way out of.


BBC producer is more more important than the racial groups he's previously tangled with/insulted/abused.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 10, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> That's a thread about Top Gear. This is dedicated to the immediate issue so ner! I don't want to wade through a thread about Top Gear to call Clarkson a cunt or speculate about his suspension.
> 
> Sorry, that was at twentythingy.


Fair enough


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> Not this time, if they're not broadcasting on Sunday.  Pulling the show mid-series suggests it's serious.  Slightly odd time for it to happen, though: they film the studio bits on Wednesday for the following Sunday's show (yes, I've been, a few years ago: I can be seen standing behind James May as he announces the 'car sauna' game  ) so you'd expect incidents with producers to happen then.  Unless they've moved it or it was over something else entirely, of course.



Rehearsals on Tuesday.

Possibly.

Could drive 5 minutes up the road and ask the bod on the gate at Dunsfold what happened, but really, far too meh about Clarkson to bother with that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 10, 2015)

Top Gear needs to be nuked from orbit and airbrushed from history (and Dave) and JTS fans need to be sent to the Gulag for reeducation


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2015)

He did a failed middle class punch on an BBC untouchable. One more untouchable than he.


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 10, 2015)

He's on a slippery slope.


----------



## gosub (Mar 10, 2015)

As it's similbroadcast worldwide not showing is going to cost someone and if he has sold the rights back, that will be license payers


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 10, 2015)

*fracas*


> A noisy, disorderly fight or quarrel. See Synonyms at  brawl.



I so hope he got twatted whilst the cameras were rolling


----------



## maomao (Mar 10, 2015)

The only problem is that he strikes me as the kind of cunt whose unlikely to have hit someone who'd hit back.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

maomao said:


> The only problem is that he strikes me as the kind of cunt whose unlikely to have hit someone who'd hit back.


well, not physically anyway. A suspension suggests he hit someone who is not defencless in other realms


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2015)

gosub said:


> As it's similbroadcast worldwide not showing is going to cost someone and if he has sold the rights back, that will be license payers


How does it work that they get all the profits but we get all the losses (and no say or input)?


----------



## Supine (Mar 10, 2015)

Bbc news just milked the story. Talking about how they can't get any information from the bbc!!!


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

Supine said:


> Bbc news just milked the story. Talking about how they can't get any information from the bbc!!!


tbf that will be BBC news talking to top gears BBC production company. I bet all is out on the rumour mill within the org though


----------



## starfish (Mar 10, 2015)

fen_boy said:


> First John Inverdale and now this, today was a good day.


What's this about Inverdale?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2015)

starfish said:


> What's this about Inverdale?



http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/slight-error-by-john-inverdale-nsfw.332992/


----------



## starfish (Mar 10, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/slight-error-by-john-inverdale-nsfw.332992/


Just saw it, cheers. I hoped it was more serious.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 10, 2015)

Richard Hammond is a vile little bully's sidekick


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 10, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Richard Hammond is a vile little bully's sidekick


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Richard Hammond is a vile little bully's sidekick





starfish said:


> Just saw it, cheers. I hoped it was more serious.



So close.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 10, 2015)

Supine said:


> Bbc news just milked the story. Talking about how they can't get any information from the bbc!!!



You wouldn't expect any company/organisation to discuss employee disciplinary proceedings while they are ongoing tbf.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 10, 2015)

C4 news just said he "punched" the bod


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 10, 2015)

God Stewart Lee is fit


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> C4 news just said he "punched" the bod


I knew it. One to many at the beeb bar and then a gainsaying over something trivial


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 10, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Richard Hammond is a vile little bully's sidekick


Also a racist.


----------



## Mogden (Mar 10, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> God Stewart Lee is fit


I was thinking the same. My foof has been cockahoop watching that!


----------



## xenon (Mar 10, 2015)

Punchh up. Clarkson gets chinned by his producer. Or visa versa.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 10, 2015)

xenon said:


> Punchh up. Clarkson gets chinned by his producer. Or visa versa.


Vice versa


----------



## Mogden (Mar 10, 2015)

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015...tponed-after-jeremy-clarkson-punches-producer

Tried to twat them which I take to mean too drunk to twat properly or just a really shit fighter.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 10, 2015)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/bring-back-jeremy-clarkson-petition-5307863

sigh  





> *A huge number of people have signed the petition which demands the Top Gear host's reinstatement*


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 10, 2015)

'It's OK to be racist, but we'll not tolerate anyone twatting middle management'


----------



## Looby (Mar 10, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> God Stewart Lee is fit



He really is. I met him and I was mumbling about the merch stall not taking debit cards as I was embarrassed I hadn't bought anything. So embarrassing. [emoji1]


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 10, 2015)

And somewhere in Barnsley Michael Dugher will be smiling to himself!


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 10, 2015)

http://www.theguardian.com/media/20...ced-ban-on-all-male-panels-says-jason-manford

So which woman should get wankstains job when they sack him?


----------



## likesfish (Mar 10, 2015)

Tbf punching middle management should always be encouraged especailly if its bbc management a lower from of life that isnt actually criminal would be harder to find.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 10, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> So which woman should get wankstains job when they sack him?



Vicki Butler-Henderson or Sabine Schmitz would change the dynamic in a good way I think.


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 10, 2015)

For the ladies whose hoofs go cockerwhoop for Stewart Lee


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 10, 2015)

Buckaroo said:


> He's on a slippery slope.



Or a gradient, in driving terms.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2015)

he certainly missed biting point


----------



## Sweet FA (Mar 10, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> He did a failed middle class punch on an BBC untouchable


"throwing a punch" becomes a lunge over a table. Hold me back etc. Didn't connect, storm in a teacup, ratings gusher.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 10, 2015)

belboid said:


> contract null and void if he's sacked




I dunno, when I checked my my contract for non competition stuff , itwas 2 years after leaving, when I got made redendant

pretty sure a lawyer would not allow this on an asset like Clarkson though


----------



## Espresso (Mar 10, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> For the ladies whose *hoofs* go cockerwhoop for Stewart Lee




Hoofs? What sort of women do you know?
Foofs, with two owes and two effs.


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 10, 2015)

Espresso said:


> Hoofs? What sort of women do you know?
> Foofs, with two owes and two effs.


Oops, oofs, foops, obviously a Freudian slipper

He's a very clever lad though and I'd do him if I wanted an imaginary gay wife


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> I dunno, when I checked my my contract for non competition stuff , itwas 2 years after leaving, when I got made redendant
> 
> pretty sure a lawyer would not allow this on an asset like Clarkson though


massive difference between redundancy and being sacked tho.  When you're redundant, your contract has come to and end, but is still valid, so any ongoing terms remain in place. If you're sacked, the whole thing is ripped up, non competition clauses wont apply.

The beeb will have done a cost-benefit analysis


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 10, 2015)

and Sky will be working out an offer price...
http://news.sky.com/story/1442344/clarkson-jokes-on-twitter-after-suspension



> But media commentator Neil Midgley told Sky: "There are other potential homes for Mr Clarkson than on the BBC" and he claimed ITV were looking to develop a car-based panel show.
> 
> Mr Midgley believed that if Clarkson did leave Top Gear then there would be a bidding war between rival broadcasters.



There's only one way to get rid of the cunt


----------



## Favelado (Mar 10, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> and Sky will be working out an offer price...
> http://news.sky.com/story/1442344/clarkson-jokes-on-twitter-after-suspension
> 
> 
> ...




It was worth watching the Liverpool edition just to hear them say, "If you wanna a Why Don't You Fachhhh Pacccchhhh....."


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

Favelado said:


> It was worth watching the Liverpool edition just to hear them say, "If you wanna a Why Don't You Fachhhh Pacccchhhh....."


A mate of mine was on that edition!


----------



## tim (Mar 11, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Should save the Beeb a few bob.



I think, rather like Benny Hill, hhe's a big international money spinner. People abroad only get irritated when takes the piss out of their country. They don't mind it when he mocks other foreigners. It's only the British who feel permanently embarrassed and humiliated by the wanker.


----------



## belboid (Mar 11, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> and Sky will be working out an offer price...
> http://news.sky.com/story/1442344/clarkson-jokes-on-twitter-after-suspension


or the move abroad, even a failed two year yankee career will be worth more than sky could pay in a decade


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

but would hamster and the other one who makes no bones of his hideous bourgeois nature move with him.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

My Facebook is full of this.

One 'Keep calm and save Jezza' poster 
Then my mate wrote: So what, he speaks his mind!

Well yeah he certainly does and that is why people love him. Cos he says what a lot of people think but can't say. My step dad fucking loves him he's almost a hero in his eyes and he sees him as a lone voice against the man.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 11, 2015)

Maybe they'll try to keep making it with guest presenters. Then we'll know for certain who is vermin. Well, if we bother to check. 

Hopefully he goes to Sky and never comes back.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2015)

This is has all the makings of a _Gardeners' Question Time _Classic FM defection farrago type affair


----------



## Limejuice (Mar 11, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> This is has all the makings of a _Gardeners' Question Time _Classic FM defection farrago type affair


The fracas farrago.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2015)

Limejuice said:


> The fracas farrago.


SCANDAL SHOCKER


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Well yeah he certainly does and that is why people love him. Cos he says what a lot of people think but can't say. My step dad fucking loves him he's almost a hero in his eyes and he sees him as a lone voice against the man.





Racist and boorish, he represents ultra consumer indulgence in an age of supposed austerity. He impresses those miffed that they can no longer get away with racist shit so easily. As for a lone voice against the man, he's chums with David Cameron. Take that establishment! 
He's the king of the imbeciles.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Racist and boorish, he represents ultra consumer indulgence in an age of supposed austerity. He impresses those miffed that they can no longer get away with racist shit so easily. As for a lone voice against the man, he's chums with David Cameron. Take that establishment!
> He's the king of the imbeciles.


Haha. Yeah I totally agree. He's almost the definition of a massive bellend and the old fashioned shite he comes out with makes my toes curl. He's so outdated it's proper embarrassing. But then so is my step dad. Dunno about mates my age liking him mind, but they're from Chester Le street so y'know.


----------



## dessiato (Mar 11, 2015)

moomoo said:


> Me too. I'll miss perving over Richard.


I'm sorry, but that made me laugh.


----------



## dessiato (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Haha. Yeah I totally agree. He's almost the definition of a massive bellend and the old fashioned shite he comes out with makes my toes curl. He's so outdated it's proper embarrassing..


I agree, as much as I love the programme he sometimes is too outrageous for words. But he is also like one of my greatest, but now deceased, friends. A good slap (pun intended) seems in order, and maybe this is going to be it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 11, 2015)

Im sure Top Gear can survive without that tedious gobshite. Unless people are actually only watching it because they enjoy clarksons attempts to make racism and bigotry acceptable again. 

Had a good example of this on my FB - someone giving it the whole "PC gone mad" about clarkson being suspended - cue another poster (whose profile pic shows hims in a UKIP rosette) declaring that "racism" is a made up word and that only PC nazis are offended by the word nigger. "Cos black people call each other nigger". 

Ably demonstrating how Top Gear's cynical "lets see how offensive we can be this week" schitick gives encouragement to full on racist fuckwits to slime out from under their stones. 

What about Peter Capaldi presenting it - in a mash up of his dr who and malcolm tucker characters?


----------



## DownwardDog (Mar 11, 2015)

Optimum TG line up: Chris Harris, Harry Metcalfe and Eddie Irvine.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2015)

Kaka Tim said:


> What about Peter Capaldi presenting it - in a mash up of his dr who and malcolm tucker characters?


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 11, 2015)

He thumped a producer because said producer had forgotten to lay on catering on location.

Hardly something worth a punch in the face, I'd say.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 11, 2015)

Maybe he'll become a UKIP MP.


----------



## sim667 (Mar 11, 2015)

I bet he'll end up on top gear US.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Maybe he'll become a UKIP MP.


Or he could team up with some other Angry White Blokes with political aspirations off the telly, like Robert Kilroy-Silk and Jeremy Kyle. There's even a ready-made AWB flag!


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Maybe he'll become a UKIP MP.



Or hook up with that other cunt who got booted off tv and formed Veritas. Killroy.

Beaten to it by Cinzano.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 11, 2015)

sim667 said:


> I bet he'll end up on top gear US.



Will be nice that his name will always be pronounced Germy at least.


----------



## moomoo (Mar 11, 2015)

DownwardDog said:


> Optimum TG line up: Chris Harris, Harry Metcalfe and Eddie Irvine.



And Richard Hammond.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> but would hamster and the other one who makes no bones of his hideous bourgeois nature move with him.



Not a real hamster.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 11, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Maybe he'll become a UKIP MP.



I was going to suggest Rustie Lee as his replacement.  Black, female and a UKIP member.  That'll really fuck with Top Gear fans' heads.


----------



## Santino (Mar 11, 2015)

dessiato said:


> I agree, as much as I love the programme he sometimes is too outrageous for words. But he is also like one of my greatest, but now deceased, friends. A good slap (pun intended) seems in order, and maybe this is going to be it.


 What pun?


----------



## youngian (Mar 11, 2015)

skyscraper101 said:


> Top Gear makes gazillions for the bbc. I can't see them letting him go unless it was pretty serious stuff, after all he's survived endless other 'controversies' which have all failed to unseat him or the show's popularity. A cynical person might suggest that he just does this on purpose for ratings.


He's probably had this sacking coming they were just looking for the right time when the format was looking stale. The BBC will find a Rachel Riley of cars to replace Clarkson who will not be short of offers from Ch5 and Sky. And he can always knock off his Clarkson's Crashes DVDs every Christmas. I don't mind the bloke when he's a documentary frontman and not being Jeremy Clarkson. That might be a direction in which he'd prefer anyway.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 11, 2015)

Top Gear has been on the wain for years now, even the presenters don't seem to be enjoying themselves these days.  They've run out of ideas and the joke got boring along time ago.  I know someone who's part of the crew when they go on their away jollies some of the stories he tells suggest none of them really like each other and Clarkson is exactly as he comes across on TV, a drunken boorish lout.


----------



## maomao (Mar 11, 2015)

The BBC have a reporter stood outside his house reading his tweets off her phone. 

Whoever the fuck he is, assaulting a coworker is gross misconduct and should lead to dismissal almost all of the time.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 11, 2015)

maomao said:


> The BBC have a reporter stood outside his house reading his tweets off her phone.
> 
> Whoever the fuck he is, assaulting a coworker is gross misconduct and should lead to dismissal almost all of the time.



Unless it's another host.


----------



## quiquaquo (Mar 11, 2015)

Get Gina Yashere in to replace Clarkson. Might even end up watching it then.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

its assault, and the producer should press charges and sue the fucker


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

maomao said:


> Whoever the fuck he is, assaulting a coworker is gross misconduct and should lead to dismissal almost all of the time.


It certainly should, and if it's true the beeb will have no option but to sack him - they could get in a lot of trouble if they don't.

Clarkson, May & the brummie midget will all be absolutely fine. But what I'd like to know is how this will affect all the many, non-famous people who work on Top Gear. There's going to be loads of regular employees who work on the show & Clarkson's idiocy might well end up endangering their jobs. And none of them have 50 million in the bank to fall back on....


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2015)

punching someone over catering- what a fuckin nob


----------



## Enviro (Mar 11, 2015)

I like how, on the BBS article HYS, people are comparing the swift justice meted out to Clarkson by the Beeb to their not so swift uptake on the sordid Saville affair. "Justice for Clarkson!" They say. Yeaaah Clarkson is such a national treasure he should be allowed to get away with whatever he likes for as long as he likes!


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

over 225,000 people seem to think that having a racist twat on thier TV is acceptable, in fact not just acceptable they want it.

no wonder this country is so fucked up


----------



## Ms T (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> its assault, and the producer should press charges and sue the fucker


Exactly. Nobody should be assaulted at work (or anywhere else for that matter). Sadly, the Beeb have an appalling habit of bottling these things.


----------



## dervish (Mar 11, 2015)

Why isn't there another petition saying bring back top gear without clarkson?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

its another reason not to pay the tv licence


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> over 225,000 people seem to think that having a racist twat on thier TV is acceptable, in fact not just acceptable they want it.
> 
> no wonder this country is so fucked up


I think I heard that TG gets about 5mil viewers in the UK, which means 225K is only 4.5% (so far, at least). That still leaves 95.5% of TG viewers who haven't signed that daft petition.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

still 225,000 twat out there so far tho


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

dervish said:


> Why isn't there another petition saying bring back top gear without clarkson?


I seriously doubt that's a viable option, at least on the BBC. They managed to carry on with "Have I Got News For You" without Angus Deaton, but in that instance the real stars of the show had always been Hislop & Merton. JC is the anchor of TG & intrinsically linked to it. More likely would be some commercial broadcaster like ITV or Sky will try to poach all 3 presenters & re-invent the format on their network. Same thing happened when the beeb sacked Jonathon Ross.


----------



## belboid (Mar 11, 2015)

it managed 515 episodes without him


----------



## mack (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> still 225,000 twat out there so far tho



A few more twats than that..


----------



## gabi (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> its assault, and the producer should press charges and sue the fucker



Piers Morgan has been tweeting that he was decked by Clarkson in the past leaving him scarred - questioning why that wasn't a sackable offence but punching a mere producer is. Brilliant stuff. I hope Morgan does take him to court. Win/Win.


----------



## mack (Mar 11, 2015)

gabi said:


> Piers Morgan has been tweeting that he was decked by Clarkson in the past leaving him scarred - questioning why that wasn't a sackable offence but punching a mere producer is. Brilliant stuff. I hope Morgan does take him to court. Win/Win.



The only win/win situation there would be for a fucking sinkhole to open up beneath the court and take both the odious cunts straight to hell.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

mack said:


> A few more twats than that..



300,000 million? ​


----------



## gabi (Mar 11, 2015)

mack said:


> The only win/win situation there would be for a fucking sinkhole to open up beneath the court and take both the odious cunts straight to hell.


----------



## Fingers (Mar 11, 2015)

BBC Officials to temporarily reinstate Jeremy Clarkson by putting him on a dog lead
http://www.thedailypatriot.co.uk/bb...jeremy-clarkson-by-putting-him-on-a-dog-lead/


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

belboid said:


> it managed 515 episodes without him


On old TG? The only real world similarity between old TG & new TG is the name. Old TG was a motoring show about cars, new TG is a lads mag with cars.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> over 225,000 people seem to think that having a racist twat on thier TV is acceptable, in fact not just acceptable they want it.
> 
> no wonder this country is so fucked up


Someone on PM last night said much the same thing - that Clarkson is so popular because he says what a lot of people are thinking. Those people might be twats, but they are part of our society.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

Yeah , what a wonderful society we are in , the scary thing this type of thinking is exactly what ukip want


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

Thinking about it , I can see clarkson becoming a ukip candidate if he gets sacked from tg


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

s


Citizen66 said:


> 300,000 million? ​


i myself signed 200,000 times


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2015)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Someone on PM last night said much the same thing - that Clarkson is so popular because he says what a lot of people are thinking. Those people might be twats, but they are part of our society.



Clarkson's biggest hero said 'There is no such thing as society'


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> Thinking about it , I can see clarkson becoming a ukip candidate if he gets sacked from tg




JC is smart, whatever I think of him, I dont think he would go down that route


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> JC is smart, whatever I think of him, I dont think he would go down that route


i think if he did he'd be turfed out after a week or two anyway


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Someone on PM last night said much the same thing - that Clarkson is so popular because he says what a lot of people are thinking. Those people might be twats, but they are part of our society.


Of course that's why he's so popular. A significant proportion of people in this country hold Clarkson views. And even those who might disagree with some of the views when actually challenged would still support him for saying them.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i think if he did he'd be turfed out after a week or two anyway




thats standard operating procedure for the kippers though innit


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> thats standard operating procedure for the kippers though innit


yeh. in three weeks' time, at the current rate, more people will be former ukip candidates than current ukip candidates.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 11, 2015)

belboid said:


> it managed 515 episodes without him


No it didn't. The old show was a dull and dreary thing about cars


----------



## Kesher (Mar 11, 2015)

Teaboy said:


> Top Gear has been on the wain for years now, even the presenters don't seem to be enjoying themselves these days.  They've run out of ideas and the joke got boring along time ago.  I know someone who's part of the crew when they go on their away jollies some of the stories he tells suggest none of them really like each other and Clarkson is exactly as he comes across on TV, a drunken boorish lout.



I was listening to James O'Brian on LBC who had a phone in about Clarkson's suspension: O'Brian argued that if Clarkson did punch the producer then Clarkson should be sacked; however he said that he had met Clarkson on a number of occasions and that Clarkson is a really nice bloke


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Teaboy said:


> Top Gear has been on the wain for years now


wane. wain means a cart or wagon


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 11, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> No it didn't. The old show was a dull and dreary thing about cars



Had its moments IMO: its rallying coverage with dear old Tony Mason was brilliant.     Chris Goffey's been wheeled out a couple of times in the last couple of days to give his opinion on Clarkson and the rest, despite their not having made a programme together since beardy Goffey left Top Gear sometime in the 90s...

Someone mentioned Quentin Willson a page or two back.  He's still about, now fronting some new classic car show on Channel 5.  It's not very good though.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

Kesher said:


> I was listening to James O'Brian on LBC who had a phone in about Clarkson's suspension: O'Brian argued that if Clarkson did punch the producer then Clarkson should be sacked;* however he said that he had met Clarkson on a number of occasions and that Clarkson is a really nice bloke*


Just don't be late with his dinner cos then he'll lamp you!

I'm not surprised his wife left him...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2015)

gabi said:


>



Cufflink wankers


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pretty sure most reports are saying a lunge or squared up, but no punches thrown. Proper wanky, wet public schoolboy stuff.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2015)

Kesher said:


> however he said that he had met Clarkson on a number of occasions and that Clarkson is a really nice bloke



Farrage comes across as a charming , confident bloke when I met him a long time ago. I would find it difficult to resist assailing him should I ever have the pleasure of a meet again

* edited to make sure this is not construed as a  threat/ malicious communication


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Mar 11, 2015)

'Where's my dinner'

'Not arrived Jeremy'

'You dirty rotter'

'I'm telling on you'

'go on then, tell, see if I care'

'I'll scream and scream and scream until I make myself sick!'


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Nanker Phelge said:


> 'Where's my dinner'
> 
> 'Not arrived Jeremy'
> 
> ...




Sounds about right, could have escalated to wedgies had the BBC not stepped in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Pretty sure most reports are saying a lunge or squared up, but no punches thrown. Proper wanky, wet public schoolboy stuff.


yeh but he was weak from hunger


----------



## Supine (Mar 11, 2015)

I bet Top Gear is back within two weeks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Supine said:


> I bet Top Gear is back within two weeks.



I'll take that, a score to the server fund says the remaining three shows of this series are scrapped.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sounds about right, could have escalated to wedgies had the BBC not stepped in.



Chinese Burns


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I'll take that, a score to the server fund says the remaining three shows of this series are scrapped.


Sounds like a safe bet to me.

He's been admonished many times before, but this is the first time he's been officially suspended. His presence on the BBC is becoming untenable. We've not seen the last of him, but his career on the beeb may be over. Apparently he's been offered huge sums to defect to one of the commercial broadcasters in the past, I'm guessing that's the way he might go.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Pretty sure most reports are saying a lunge or squared up, but no punches thrown. Proper wanky, wet public schoolboy stuff.


maybe he just pulled a 'come at me bro'


----------



## gosub (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> Thinking about it , I can see clarkson becoming a ukip candidate if he gets sacked from tg



Apart from him being a EUrophile who has used his Sunday Times column to take the piss out of UKIP


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

More serious than we thought, apparently the producer's name is Oisin Tymon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> More serious than we though, apparently the producer's name is Oisin Tymon.


he also goes by some other names:


Francis Ford Oisin
Billy Bob Tymon
Björn Tymon
Oisin Tymond


----------



## gosub (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I'll take that, a score to the server fund says the remaining three shows of this series are scrapped.




How much is that going to cost, seeing as the rest of the world was broadcasting it at the same time? Going to be the worlds most expensive missed meal.  But allowing 'talent' to go around punching staff can't and won't be allowed


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> How much is that going to cost, seeing as the rest of the world was broadcasting it at the same time? Going to be the worlds most expensive missed meal.  But allowing 'talent' to go around punching staff can't and won't be allowed


so you know the outcome of this investigation.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 11, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> He did a failed middle class punch on an BBC untouchable. One more untouchable than he.



"I'm a made guy - wait until they hear about this in Palermo".

I was once walking through TCD with a graduate of said institution. She pointed out a character from the French department who had apparently once attacked and beaten up one of his colleagues.


----------



## gosub (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so you know the outcome of this investigation.



I'd guess at that sort of precedent causing a strike


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

This page has been liked by 5 seperate mates of mine and 94 THOUSAND other people. The man is extremely popular 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/We-Will-Not-Watch-Top-Gear-Without-Jeremy-Clarkson/344334945759837


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> This page has been liked by 5 seperate mates of mine and 94 THOUSAND other people. The man is extremely popular
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/pages/We-Will-Not-Watch-Top-Gear-Without-Jeremy-Clarkson/344334945759837


tbh that probably suits the bbc as may, hammond and clarkson all out of contract shortly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

its the voices of the people vs the wounded honour (lol) of the bbc! who will win out.


(the beeb)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> its the voices of the people vs the wounded honour (lol) of the bbc! who will win out.
> 
> 
> (the beeb)


who cares?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> who cares?


94 thousand facebook users apparently


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 94 thousand facebook users apparently


and how many people watch top gear? rather more than that i would expect.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and how many people watch top gear? rather more than that i would expect.


350 mill worldwide weekly, 5 mill here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 350 mill worldwide weekly, 5 mill here.


so a tiny percentage of people who watch the programme give a fuck about clarkson's fate.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so a tiny percentage of people who watch the programme give a fuck about clarkson's fate.



I give a fuck about his fate. I want it to be a nasty one


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I give a fuck about his fate. I want it to be a nasty one


but do you watch the programme?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2015)

The people wanting him reinstating though would probably be all for dismissing any other worker who dare raise their voice let alone their fists to a manager.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but do you watch the programme?



Religiously.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but do you watch the programme?



No, but I car share with his cousin!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Religiously.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Sprocket. said:


> No, but I car share with his cousin!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


>




if I want to fuck a twelve year old boy whilst watching a light entertainment programme featuring the latest super cars that's no one's business but mine.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model I don't think denying the mans popularity is useful. Better to consider why he and his views are so popular in this country surely?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> if I want to fuck a twelve year old boy whilst watching a light entertainment programme featuring the latest super cars that's no one's business but mine.


and of course the 12 -year auld's.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> and of course the 12 -year auld's.



It's an ecumenical matter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Pickman's model I don't think denying the mans popularity is useful. Better to consider why he and his views are so popular in this country surely?


i am pointing out that his / his views apparently not as popular as believed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's an ecumenical matter.


you mean there's a load of priests queuing behind you


----------



## paulhackett (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> More serious than we thought, apparently the producer's name is Oisin Tymon.



He's actually called Simon Owen.

The punch was so hard it's scrambled his poor senses and he can't even say his own name.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 11, 2015)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Someone on PM last night said much the same thing - that Clarkson is so popular because he says what a lot of people are thinking. Those people might be twats, but they are part of our society.



Er, yeah.  They really need a spokesman, those people whose moronic, bigotted, fear-stricken, utterly insupportable views only command 95% of our printed media, vomit over huge swathes of the internet, and hold sway over every mainstream political decision in this country, yet who somehow get away with loudly and continually bleating about how they're the 'silent majority'


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2015)

ruffneck23 said:


> Thinking about it , I can see clarkson becoming a ukip candidate if he gets sacked from tg



Farage wouldn't want Clarkson anywhere near UKIP. Clarkson might steal his thunder.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

what's the demographick that watches tg?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Farage wouldn't want Clarkson anywhere near UKIP. Clarkson might steal his thunder.


he'd start with his thunder and then move onto his wallet


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so a tiny percentage of people who watch the programme give a fuck about clarkson's fate.


would have to poll the 350 'would you still watch your car porn if it wasn't fronted by a 'comedy' bigot'

get ashcroft on it


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i am pointing out that his / his views apparently not as popular as believed.


Do you really believe that though? Or are you trying to fit reality in with your world view? Cos from where I'm standing he seems to seen as a deliberately controversial figure but one who is pretty well liked for 'saying it as it is'. Sometimes I wonder if denying that a lot of the population hold right wing views about a lot of issues is useful.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

billy_bob said:


> Er, yeah.  They really need a spokesman, those people whose moronic, bigotted, fear-stricken, utterly insupportable views only command 95% of our printed media, vomit over huge swathes of the internet, and hold sway over every mainstream political decision in this country, yet who somehow get away with loudly and continually bleating about how they're the 'silent majority'


Politicians haven't listened about immigration tho have they?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Do you really believe that though? Or are you trying to fit reality in with your world view? Cos from where I'm standing he seems to seen as a deliberately controversial figure but one who is pretty well liked for 'saying it as it is'. Sometimes I wonder if denying that a lot of the population hold right wing views about a lot of issues is useful.


you're conflating two things, 1) jeremy clarkson and his views, and 2) right wing views. i am not denying 2) i am denying 1) as popular as claimed. tell you what, you produce more than assertion about clarkson's popularity and then we'll see where we go.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Politicians haven't listened about immigration tho have they?


What do you mean? We have some extremely vile immigration rules for people outside the EU, which are frankly racist in their effect. And the only way to reduce immigration from the rest of the EU is to leave the EU. I'd say rather the opposite of this - not only have they been listening, but politicians of all main parties have been adding to the catalogue of misinformation that has scapegoated immigration and immigrants for their failings.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Politicians haven't listened about immigration tho have they?



That depends on your perspective, I suppose. In my view, legislation around asylum seeking and immigration more broadly has done nothing but get stricter and harsher over the last two decades, almost always as a result of knee-jerk pandering to the continual stream of loud, regressive noise from the same parts of society who continually complain that they 'haven't been listened to', by politicians who mistakenly believe that this will appease the type of people who would otherwise turn for their fix of anti-immigrant bile to BNP/English Democrats/UKIP/whoever comes along next.

I don't doubt that many people genuinely believe they haven't been listened to.  I believe they've largely been duped and manipulated into believing this by media and political discourse that has successfully hidden the fact that our immigration laws aren't liberal at all. It also, very often, masks the fact that for many of the people who use the 'no-one asked us' line of argument, no amount of _reasonable _concessions would satisfy them, because however much they tart it up there's straight-up racism at the root of their objections to immigration.

In other words, seriously: how many people who give you the 'I've nothing against it, as long as they... [integrate/don't live right next door/get jobs/don't take jobs/put their bins out on the right day/don't have a different culture to me... delete as the whim takes you]' crap _don't_ really mean 'I wish there were fewer brown people'?


----------



## Poot (Mar 11, 2015)

Him and Farage certainly seem to be the 2 people about whom a lot of people say (mistakenly) "he's only saying what we're all thinking !" I've never really understood why that should be.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

Has Clarkson ever twatted on about immigration? 

Not sure where the idea that he is UKIP-friendly comes from.


----------



## Poot (Mar 11, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Has Clarkson ever twatted on about immigration?
> 
> Not sure where the idea that he is UKIP-friendly comes from.


If you drew a venn diagram of his views and Farage's views I don't think there would be much outside the middle. Just a hunch.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Has Clarkson ever twatted on about immigration?
> 
> Not sure where the idea that he is UKIP-friendly comes from.



He's done a few racist 'gaffes' and writes for The Sun, so it isn't entirely that crazy a conclusion to draw.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

There's a popular conception/misconception that immigrants are coming to the uk to earn money to send home, taking British jobs, claiming benefits, using the NHS. And that politicians have welcomed immigration to drive down labour costs. And that immigration laws should be tighter. That's why UKIP and Clarkson's views are popular (and gaining popularity, due to 'austerity'?).

And yeah most of it's just straight up racism and fear, and probably not born out of any economical basis or even rational thought- cos so & so down the shop/pub/work is ok even tho they're an immigrant etc.

I've no idea what percentage of the population think like that. Or to what extent the fears are justified.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> He's done a few racist 'gaffes' and writes for The Sun, so it isn't entirely that crazy a conclusion to draw.


He's quite openly racist.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> He's quite openly racist.



Then again, so are some Tories.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Here he is being racist about border controls, Mexicans, Indians and the Scottish. All in jest of course. Can't you take a joke? 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ays-could-be-solved-with-a-bit-of-racism.html


----------



## maomao (Mar 11, 2015)

Twat on the BBC saying Clarkson is popular because he puts forward a point of view that isn't heard very much. She must have access to very different media to me because I hear little fucking else. I'm sure there's millions of people in the country that believe he should be fucked off or even prosecuted for assaulting someone if that's what he did (more likely a lot of bluster and a limp little slap, he's all stomach and no muscle that cunt) but they won't shut up about a couple of hundred thousand people signing a petition.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> He's quite openly racist.


Professionally so, no? That's his schtick. Still not quite the same as doing UKIP-style anti-immigration crap - fewer laughs to be got from that.


----------



## belboid (Mar 11, 2015)

Hadn't realised his contract was up next month.  As a non-employee, he can't even be properly sacked!  Blooming farcical.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> There's a popular conception/misconception that immigrants are coming to the uk to earn money to send home, taking British jobs, claiming benefits, using the NHS.


is it anyone else's business what someone does with their money? if they want to spend it all on candy floss or tinned fried onions or send it to lesotho who cares?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Here he is being racist about border controls, Mexicans, Indians and the Scottish. All in jest of course. Can't you take a joke?
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ays-could-be-solved-with-a-bit-of-racism.html


i don't think you can be racist about border controls, on the basis they're not a race.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> is it anyone else's business what someone does with their money? if they want to spend it all on candy floss or tinned fried onions or send it to lesotho who cares?


Absolutely!


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Professionally so, no? That's his schtick. Still not quite the same as doing UKIP-style anti-immigration crap - fewer laughs to be got from that.


Indeed.

Tbh I'm never sure if the left have an overly optimistic view of how racist most people are, or if I've just happened to come across more racist people in life than other people. Both maybe.


----------



## Poot (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Tbh I'm never sure if the left have an overly optimistic view of how racist most people are, or if I've just happened to come across more racist people in life than other people. Both maybe.


Probably both. I see quite a lot too.


----------



## girasol (Mar 11, 2015)

Is JC really 54 years old????  I thought he was in his 70s...

Haven't read the thread, and probably won't either, but is there a petition going to ensure he never works for the BBC again?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

girasol said:


> Is JC really 54 years old????  I thought he was in his 70s...


only physically


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

girasol said:


> Is JC really 54 years old????  I thought he was in his 70s...


That's the decade he comes from.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Tbh I'm never sure if the left have an overly optimistic view of how racist most people are, or if I've just happened to come across more racist people in life than other people. Both maybe.



I come across plenty. Mainly at work. They must come across plenty too as the automatic assumption is that I'll be agreeable to it. And then when they find out you're not they don't like it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> There's a popular conception/misconception that immigrants are coming to the uk to earn money to send home, taking British jobs, claiming benefits, using the NHS. And that politicians have welcomed immigration to drive down labour costs. And that immigration laws should be tighter. That's why UKIP and Clarkson's views are popular (and gaining popularity, due to 'austerity'?).


Those ideas seem popular because the politicians and press don't stop battering people with them, those views are to divert people away from the 'austerity' agenda and pin it's shortcoming on immigrants.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Tbh I'm never sure if the left have an overly optimistic view of how racist most people are, *or if I've just happened to come across more racist people in life than other people*. Both maybe.



Depending on who you are are where you are from that is probably a useful reflection.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 11, 2015)

Maybe we should let the Clarksons of the world have their way and stop immigration completely. Then, when everyone starts to starve to death in the 2040s because there are only pensioners and no tax-payers left, I can gasp out my final words of "I.....told....you....so" before kicking the bucket vindicated.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Maybe we should let the Clarksons of the world have their way and stop immigration completely. Then, when everyone starts to starve to death in the 2040s because there are only pensioners and no tax-payers left, I can gasp out my final words of "I.....told....you....so" before kicking the bucket vindicated.


Is that your argument for immigration though? That we need immigrants to care for our increasingly ageing population (either directly in the NHS/ social care or indirectly through taxes)?

Or is immigration good for another reason? Like a socialist reason about the wealth of this country being more evenly distributed.


----------



## D'wards (Mar 11, 2015)

God knows, he has said  terrible things, but one clip they keep playing on LBC was when he said of Public sector strikes “I’d have them all shot. I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families.
“I mean how dare they go on strike when they’ve got these gilt-edged pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work for a living.”

But I saw the original interview on The One Show and he actually said something like "If people want to strike then good for them, its a way of getting your point across, but as this is the BBC I feel I should put over the alternative argument for balance" then went on about the being shot, which was clearly a joke.

So even arseholes can be genuinely misquoted.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Or is immigration good for another reason? Like a socialist reason about the wealth of this country being more evenly distributed.


Eh?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Is that your argument for immigration though? That we need immigrants to care for our increasingly ageing population (either directly in the NHS/ social care or indirectly through taxes)?
> 
> Or is immigration good for another reason? Like a socialist reason about the wealth of this country being more evenly distributed.



What is your position on immigration?


----------



## hash tag (Mar 11, 2015)

I see this thread has turned political. Perhaps, if clarkson is sacked he could stand for rifkinds seat?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

We need to look at countries with net emigration and see what they're doing right, then copy it. Bulgaria, for instance. The place is emptying. We should send a task force and see how they manage it. If individual cities are swelling too much, perhaps they could take a leaf out of Detroit's book.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> What is your position on immigration?


Wrote a reply but hesitate to say it tbh


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Wrote a reply but hesitate to say it tbh


is it that you don't have an opinion on immigration?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Wrote a reply but hesitate to say it tbh



Well I asked because you seem to want to talk about immigration.

JC has had plenty of warnings from the BBC before now for racist/offensive comments and questionable behaviour. You are on this thread now insisting that many people think like him as opposed to thinking that people just love a controversial celebrity (think about Gordon Ramsey as another example).


----------



## D'wards (Mar 11, 2015)

Clearly he's just gonna fuck off to Sky or ITV, who will defo have him. All three presenters will surely. BBC may own the brand but its a magazine format - easily recreated, probably down to using the same studio and test track. No copyright infringement at all.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> is it that you don't have an opinion on immigration?


I really don't know. Not a very well informed position. Obviously I believe that individual immigrants and their communities should be treated with dignity and respect. But as a political policy I don't know. 

I guess I sometimes think that we need to protect our social security and NHS and jobs for our own people, but there could be an argument (like Favelado put across above) that allowing or encouraging immigration might be the best way to do this. Ie we'd be better off economically if we have more immigration. 

I don't know what I think about any argument for immigration based on a 'one world, share the wealth more equally' idea. On the one hand it's awful that we swan about in cars, with iPads and state of the art healthcare while in other countries children die from a lack of clean water and mosquito nets. On the other hand, I feel that if we had open borders that'd threaten my kids (or grand kids) wellbeing. We're currently privileged and protected after all.

I think I also have views (that'd be probably branded as racist) about protecting values and our culture.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We need to look at countries with net emigration and see what they're doing right, then copy it. Bulgaria, for instance. The place is emptying. We should send a task force and see how they manage it. If individual cities are swelling too much, perhaps they could take a leaf out of Detroit's book.




Turning Kensington & Chelsea in to a mock-up of Aleppo gets my vote


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Turning Kensington & Chelsea in to a mock-up of Aleppo gets my vote


not demolishing the v&a, science museum and natural history museum


----------



## D'wards (Mar 11, 2015)

Without reading the thread, do we actually know Clarkson's views on immigration. He my have a pop at Johnny Foreigner, for pay, to a deadline (thanks Stewert Lee), but afaik he's never come out in support of any political party.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks; when you look who is doing the banging on about immigration you can be certain that they don't give a flying fuck about you, your kids or potential grand kids, in fact they despise you. So probably safest to go with the exact opposite of their views.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not demolishing the v&a, science museum and natural history museum



Yep, I'm gonna be an new ISIS. kabbes can be Goldie (he's mean on the decks) and we can all loot the infidel treasures and maybe move them to Dorking. Dorking is lacking in dinosaurs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yep, I'm gonna be an new ISIS. kabbes can be Goldie (he's mean on the decks) and we can all loot the infidel treasures and maybe move them to Dorking. Dorking is lacking in dinosaurs.


dorking famous for its fictional battle.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> dorking famous for its fictional battle.



Beats my part of the Surrey Hills, famous for a woman shoving rabbit parts up her cunt and pretending to give birth to them...


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Beats my part of the Surrey Hills, famous for a woman shoving rabbit parts up her cunt and pretending to give birth to them...


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> I think I also have views (that'd be probably branded as racist) about protecting values and our culture.



I'd be interested in hearing about what "values" you find important to safeguard and how they are defined. Ditto culture. I find it hard to see how these (however defined) are threatened by immigration or that it serves any purpose to preserve an idea of national culture as static and unable to evolve.

(way off topic, soz)


----------



## JimW (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Beats my part of the Surrey Hills, famous for a woman shoving rabbit parts up her cunt and pretending to give birth to them...


I've heard that story! 17th century or something wasn't it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

eatmorecheese said:


> (way off topic, soz)


When the topic is Jeremy Clarkson, the further off it we can get the better.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

JimW said:


> I've heard that story! 17th century or something wasn't it?




http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Toft


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2015)

JimW said:


> I've heard that story! 17th century or something wasn't it?



1727, fooled the UK medical establishment of the time. 

No Sky TV or scratchcards back then, so you had to make your own entertainment I guess.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 11, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yep, I'm gonna be an new ISIS. kabbes can be Goldie (he's mean on the decks) and we can all loot the infidel treasures and maybe move them to Dorking. Dorking is lacking in dinosaurs.


Quite a few live there, believe me.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2015)

I live down the road, il go investigate when I'm back from working away...


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 11, 2015)

I'm on the fence wrt immigration. On the one hand I have absolutely no problem with people coming here for work, to improve their lives or any reason at all really. On the other I can't ignore the function it serves in the context of capitalism. Flooding the labour market both places downward pressure on wages and provides the elite with a handy scapegoat for their grand larceny. It also places pressure on services and it's the working class who suffer that, not the rich. Of course I don't blame the immigrants themselves for it.


----------



## stuff_it (Mar 11, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> Shame he couldn't have taken Hammond down with him. [emoji20]


I'm guessing Hammond is in the producer's back pocket...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 11, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm on the fence wrt immigration. On the one hand I have absolutely no problem with people coming here for work, to improve their lives or any reason at all really. On the other I can't ignore the function it serves in the context of capitalism. Flooding the labour market both places downward pressure on wages and provides the elite with a handy scapegoat for their grand larceny. It also places pressure on services and it's the working class who suffer that, not the rich. Of course I don't blame the immigrants themselves for it.


 
Keeps wages down and the PC crowd can't say nuffink - go capitalism!


----------



## laptop (Mar 11, 2015)

belboid said:


> If you're sacked, the whole [contract ] is ripped up, non competition clauses wont apply.



Are you *sure* about that?

If confidentiality clauses, for example, don't survive sacking for gross misconduct, then there's trouble ahead for many.

And since he was a contractor, not an employee, the contract can say pretty much what the BBC's lawyers want it to say - though Clarkson's lawyers will have been more of a match for them than most.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2015)

yup, whether you resign/ redundant/ sacked, the confidentiality/non compete clauses are still valid - assuming there is no technical reason to call the sacking/ redundancy process illegal - otherwise everyone would just take a poo on the MDs desk to ensure they got the sack and could go and work for the competition

this is what me brief told me last year when I was looking at redundancy and non compete


----------



## paolo (Mar 11, 2015)

Would be a great opportunity to move on from the "just middle aged blokes" thing.

Bring back VBH - or hire Jodie Kidd. Or the German woman who's the whizz on the Nurburgring.


----------



## JimW (Mar 11, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> ...
> 
> .... when I was looking at redundancy and non compete


Be honest, it was after that time you shat on the HR department conference table.


----------



## Supine (Mar 11, 2015)

Just saw the James May interview who said he didn't know what happened because he apwas hammered at the time. Pub brawl? LOL


----------



## chandlerp (Mar 11, 2015)




----------



## dendrite (Mar 11, 2015)

The rescue Jezza petition has now doubled, in one day, no more page 3's total for three years, and edged above the the one demanding IDS live on £53. I can't tell what to infer about the politics of it from the bare magnitude of support. These are five of the top liked ten or so reasons though:

_I pay my TV license to ensure that irreverent people can express themselves. If you become boarding and politically correct, you may disappear BBC.

A minority of over sensitive people should not ruin one of Britons favourite shows.

Jeremy is a bastion of light in a dark PC world. 

I'm signing because the far bigger evil is censorship via political correctness which the BBC have been indulging in for far too long_

_Because its the only thing left that justifies the license fee. This is just left wing BBC censoring the only right wing comedy left.

_


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

I think many people are desperate. They no longer believe their political votes mean jack shit but like to think and are willing to try to exercise some kind of power. I don't believe that many people actually give a fuck about or his views above him being a controversial celeb. It's all the most recent news dramas rolled into one. I think the fact people have to pay for the BBC is an important aspect of this, underneath it all. If it were ITV now, I don't imagine half as many people would move their mouse fingers to even click.


----------



## Looby (Mar 11, 2015)

I think people do care about his views, they want the validation that their foul, bigoted views are ok. The likes of Jeremy Clarkson make it ok and acceptable. 
The people signing this petition and posting comments about 'pc gone mad' are stupid, fucking idiots.
Even if you ignore all the offensive shit he's spouted over the years, the bloke apparently punched someone in an argument over his lunch ffs. That should lead to immediate suspension in any fucking job.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 11, 2015)

I'm fucking *delighted* that he's in trouble, the reactionary, moronic twat.

And especially because him getting into trouble pisses off people who are braindead enough to be *that* unembarassed by the sheer unoriginality of Tory media cliches. I mean are they *really* that  convinced that 'PC' actually has 'gone mad' (my arse!   ). Yes they are ...

People like that class of twazzock have been duped enough by the right wing press, and by Clarkson himself (some overlap there) to have built him up as their 'speak truth to power' 'hero' for years 

Stupidity knows few limits.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 11, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> the bloke apparently punched someone in an argument over his lunch ffs. *That should lead to immediate suspension in any fucking job.*



Damn right. People signing that petition don't seem to think any normal rules should apply. Because he's Clarkson.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

It baffles me why his programme is so popular. I know lots of people drive cars, but still...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Damn right. People signing that petition don't seem to think any normal rules should apply. Because he's Clarkson.



I don't think they are even thinking about the fact he punched someone. The titalation of abusive reality shows has been normalised. Of course he should be sacked, that's long overdue already...I just don't think people are applying the same 'work' and equality rights in this case because it's a celeb. Which is all levels of fucking sad and rage making.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Denying that he's a right wing racist, and denying that the people who support him do so cos they share his views, is fantasy stuff. Better to face reality.


----------



## joustmaster (Mar 11, 2015)

chandlerp said:


>



He should probably just turn his heating up


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> It baffles me why his programme is so popular. I know lots of people drive cars, but still...


It's not about cars. It's a televised lads mag entertainment which kinda hangs itself vaguely on being about cars. I mean my kids and me watch it and honestly I don't know or care about cars, it's just entertainment and a laugh.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> It's not about cars. It's a televised lads mag entertainment which kinda hangs itself vaguely on being about cars. I mean my kids and me watch it and honestly I don't know or care about cars, it's just entertainment and a laugh.


OK. But it baffles me how people find it funny or entertaining. I've only ever caught the back end of it at home and have maybe watched it a couple of times whilst staying with a mate who has a car. I find most entertainment programmes make me reach for my phone, mind.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> I think people do care about his views, they want the validation that their foul, bigoted views are ok. The likes of Jeremy Clarkson make it ok and acceptable.



You know I haven't read anything coherent about what his views are apart from his racist comments/jokes. Although granted that is enough for me in itself to fuck him off.

It is interesting that on the back of that this thread became a discussion about immigration and how immigrants are threatening  culture/values. My infinite sadness is some WC people drink this shit up and use it as an outlet for their anger/frustration against things that immigrants have jack shit power over. I fucking hate to see WC people being used in this way.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> It's not about cars. It's a televised lads mag entertainment which kinda hangs itself vaguely on being about cars. I mean my kids and me watch it and honestly I don't know or care about cars, it's just entertainment and a laugh.



What are you laughing at? What are the messages about how to be and what is acceptable behaviour are you and the kids enjoying? Does that programme and the likes of super rich and smug JC reflect you, your life and values, the things you aspire for your kids?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> OK. But it baffles me how people find it funny or entertaining. I've only ever caught the back end of it at home and have maybe watched it a couple of times whilst staying with a mate who has a car. I find most entertainment programmes make me reach for my phone, mind.


I find it only just interesting enough to watch. My eldest son likes it though so it gets put on. They're kinda grown men going on mad escapades and having a laugh together, or taking the piss with or about celebrities, or anything remotely worthy. With cars. You might not like it but it's appeal isn't hard to fathom.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> You know I haven't read anything coherent about what his views are apart from his racist comments/jokes. Although granted that is enough for me in itself to fuck him off.
> 
> It is interesting that on the back of that this thread became a discussion about immigration and how immigrants are threatening  culture/values. My infinite sadness is some WC people drink this shit up and use it as an outlet for their anger/frustration against things that immigrants have jack shit power over. I fucking hate to see WC people being used in this way.


No offence to you but that is well patronising.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

He said nigger in a racist rhyme whilst filming some shit about a car for the BBC. yet that didn't get him fired.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> No offence to you but that is well patronising.



You feel patronised by me and my views?

I am WC, I speak from my experience. Do you see yourself in what I say?


----------



## SovietArmy (Mar 11, 2015)

Why he was not arrested ah I see his too important twat.
I did not found if is any petition to get him out from BBC?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Don't think I entirely swallow this whole working class manipulated by the media and the government into being racist or right wing thing. Uh uh.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> He said nigger in a racist rhyme whilst filming some shit about a car for the BBC. yet that didn't get him fined.



Disparaging comments about Asian people though did get the show censored by ofcom. No suspension or sacking though.


----------



## dendrite (Mar 11, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> I mean are they really that  convinced that 'PC' actually has 'gone mad' (my arse!   ). Yes they are ...[/QUOTE



My impression is some of them are not only convinced of it, but they actually feel painfully oppressed by a PC Brigade, which they see as using social justice issues basically narcissistically. With themselves serving as villains / scum - fodder for the crusades. And because they really don't like feeling that they might be scum, it doesn't matter how unoppressed they are materially - percieved contempt is all they need to react against.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> Don't think I entirely swallow this whole working class manipulated by the media and the government into being racist or right wing thing. Uh uh.



You think views like that are nature then? Innate, that we are born with them?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> I find it only just interesting enough to watch. My eldest son likes it though so it gets put on. They're kinda grown men going on mad escapades and having a laugh together, or taking the piss with or about celebrities, or anything remotely worthy. With cars. You might not like it but it's appeal isn't hard to fathom.


To me, they are the sort of bullying cunts you have at school who think they are the bees' knees and laugh at their own cruel jokes, who don't realise that everyone hates them. What's crushing to witness is that everyone does actually like them and think their jokes and their whole unpleasant schtick is funny. Depressing.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> You feel patronised by me and my views?
> 
> I am WC, I speak from my experience. Do you see yourself in what I say?


No I just think that you think that when you offer your views, that's cos you've considered stuff and formed your own opinion. But with someone with right wing views, that's cos they've been manipulated. It might just be that they disagree with you!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

He's Nick Ferrari on TV. Being paid to be offensive, lauding in that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Disparaging comments about Asian people though did get the show censored by ofcom. No suspension or sacking though.


Sorry I meant to type fired not fined


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> To me, they are the sort of bullying cunts you have at school who think they are the bees' knees and laugh at their own cruel jokes, who don't realise that everyone hates them. What's crushing to witness is that everyone does actually like them and think their jokes and their whole unpleasant schtick is funny. Depressing.


I'd agree with that


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> You think views like that are nature then? Innate, that we are born with them?


That wasn't quite what I said. But I gotta go to bed now!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> No I just think that you think that when you offer your views, that's cos you've considered stuff and formed your own opinion. But with someone with right wing views, that's cos they've been manipulated. It might just be that they disagree with you!



Of course they disagree with me. 

I am accused of being manipulated by the so called 'left' all the time...mainly by people with right wing views as it goes. 

I don't know everything of course...I am aware enough of the modes and influences of our political system and media to understand how it works though...so I call it manipulation, because that is what I experience it to be. I haven't been immune to it...I have had to do all kinds of undoing myself.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> That wasn't quite what I said. But I gotta go to bed now!



But you alluded to the fact that these views are not nurtured or learnt in your opinion.

Anyway...night


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> To me, they are the sort of bullying cunts you have at school who think they are the bees' knees and laugh at their own cruel jokes, who don't realise that everyone hates them. What's crushing to witness is that everyone does actually like them and think their jokes and their whole unpleasant schtick is funny. Depressing.


Yeah, that's about it for me, too. Except that ime those bullying cunts at school weren't hated by everyone. A fair few wanted to be their mates.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, that's about it for me, too. Except that ime those bullying cunts at school weren't hated by everyone. A fair few wanted to be their mates.



Because they didn't feel confident enough to assert their difference/difference of opinion...what has changed?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 11, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> Because they didn't feel confident enough to assert their difference/difference of opinion...what has changed?


You would hope that people grow up to become adults who do find that confidence. Thinking back, I can remember several kids who I was actually jealous of at one time or another, but by fuck I'm glad now that I wasn't like them. But we nearly all like being part of a group. It's a powerful part of being human.


----------



## Cid (Mar 11, 2015)

People watch Top Gear because they do fun stuff. It's enjoyable after a few drinks. They chop up cars and turn them into other things. They drive fast cars that are quite cool to anyone interested in everything from engineering to moving quickly. Their production is good. They are also complete knobs, but this is probably only about 2% of the programme. Unless it's a special. The BBC broadcasts a lot of racist shit. Fuck, Stephen Fry's been known to come out with a 'hilarious' Nigerian accent on QI. It's a white m/c institution, Clarkson is just another wheel in it. He's not exceptional. I mean ffs there's a new (and completely shit) Matt Lucas vehicle on at the moment. Anyone remember 'Come fly with me'?











etc

I don't have much sympathy for Clarkson (I also suspect he doesn't really give a shit), but the bloke he (allegedly) punched has been a producer on the show for 10 years. The cunt's worked with the cunt for that long. He's sniggered at Mexicans and 'slope', he's said nothing in the editing room, he's just as complicit in this shit. He quite possibly deserves being 'involved in a fracas'. If they get rid of Clarkson (and they are probably praying this blows over quickly - will cost them a lot) it will change precisely fuck all.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

Cameron's weighed in on Clarkson's side. Obviously such an important matter requires a direct opinion from the PM and, indeed, a video statement.


----------



## xenon (Mar 12, 2015)

I watched a whole top gear once. Probably twice. You know, it was alright. This was before the Internet or drinking obviously.


----------



## laptop (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> Cameron's weighed in on Clarkson's side. Obviously such an important matter requires a direct opinion from the PM and, indeed, a video statement.



Odds on it emerging that the odious one lamped the producer precisely to give Cameron the chance to do this?




Except... Except that... Is Cameron saying shit-for-brains was right to assault his boss?

(If of course he did so as reported and, as far as I am aware, undenied. No charges were active at the time of writing.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

laptop said:


> Odds on it emerging that the odious one lamped the producer precisely to give Cameron the chance to do this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what does a producer do and how is he clarkson's boss?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> Cameron's weighed in on Clarkson's side. Obviously such an important matter requires a direct opinion from the PM and, indeed, a video statement.



/morning facepalm

Good grief.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> /morning facepalm
> 
> Good grief.


was it blair or brown who as pm issued a statement about a coronation st plot development?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

Apparently the kitchen staff at the hotel had fucked off home so Clarkson couldn't have the steak he was demanding. This was due to Clarkson keeping everyone waiting whilst he sat in the pub, so they arrived later than their allocated window for dining. He took it out on the producer.

So on top of everything else, he's an entitled fucking diva.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> was it blair or brown who as pm issued a statement about a coronation st plot development?


Blair I think. Free Deirdre!


----------



## J Ed (Mar 12, 2015)

Funny how anything to do with Cameron's best mate brings out the racists


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> Cameron's weighed in on Clarkson's side. Obviously such an important matter requires a direct opinion from the PM and, indeed, a video statement.


----------



## J Ed (Mar 12, 2015)

Oh a racist lamps a colleague and gets suspended, obv the cultural Marxists are trying to replace him with women and gays and disabled ethnics. PC gorn mad! Can't a posh racist who's never off telly, gets vocal support from the Prime Minister and a Telegraph column ever catch a break?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Oh a racist lamps a colleague and gets suspended, obv the cultural Marxists are trying to replace him with women and gays and disabled ethnics. PC gorn mad! Can't a posh racist who's never off telly, gets vocal support from the Prime Minister and a Telegraph column ever catch a break?


wouldn't be surprised if it turned out the three amigos rather more intimate than friends wont to be


----------



## J Ed (Mar 12, 2015)

Turn Chipping Norton into fucking glass.


----------



## J Ed (Mar 12, 2015)

Seize private medical insurance data to pinpoint which houses should be specifically targeted prior to and following the carpet bombing. I only say this in the interest of balance, of course.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Mar 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Oh a racist lamps a colleague and gets suspended, obv the cultural Marxists are trying to replace him with women and gays and disabled ethnics. PC gorn mad! Can't a posh racist who's never off telly, gets vocal support from the Prime Minister and a Telegraph column ever catch a break?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Apparently the kitchen staff at the hotel had fucked off home so Clarkson couldn't have the steak he was demanding. This was due to Clarkson keeping everyone waiting whilst he sat in the pub, so they arrived later than their allocated window for dining. He took it out on the producer.
> 
> So on top of everything else, he's an entitled fucking diva.


not that entitled or he'd have had his steak


----------



## Plumdaff (Mar 12, 2015)

I'm shocked to hear that a petition that got blanket coverage from the Beeb yesterday has done quite well.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not that entitled or he'd have had his steak



Well I suppose dragging a farmer out of bed and getting him to slaughter and butcher one from his herd, or getting Waitrose to send a fillet out in a taxi isn't too big an ask. The producer could have prepared it for him.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> Turn Chipping Norton into fucking glass.


Quite possibly the best pre-election campaign slogan I've ever heard


----------



## mod (Mar 12, 2015)

David Cameron has publicly backed a known racist who's just punched his boss and been sacked. Had previously hired Andy coulson after being warned about his murky past and sent supportive text to rebekah brooks (also a close personal friend of clarkson) after the paper she edited was closed down after it emerged they'd hacked milly dowler phone. What a bunch of odious scumbags.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 12, 2015)

mod said:


> David Cameron has publicly backed a known racist who's just punched his boss...



Is an assistant producer on a TV show like _Top Gear_ a boss to contracted-in ‘talent’ like Clarkson, or an underling?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 12, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Is an assistant producer on a TV show like _Top Gear_ a boss to contracted-in ‘talent’ like Clarkson, or an underling?



This was probably the very question which provoked the fracas. I suspect someone like Clarkson considers everyone around him to be an underling.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Mar 12, 2015)

There is now a petition seeking to counteract the ridiculous one which says he should be reinstated before we even find out what he has done this time. 

This petition at least says he should be sacked for all the other things he has done, as much as whatever he did last week!  And it points out the hypocrisy - some presenters were sacked for merely mentioning something off air which the BBC didn't like, yet Clarkson repeatedly gets away with stuff.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petiti...&source=facebook-share-button&time=1426111529


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Apparently the kitchen staff at the hotel had fucked off home so Clarkson couldn't have the steak he was demanding. This was due to Clarkson keeping everyone waiting whilst he sat in the pub, so they arrived later than their allocated window for dining. He took it out on the producer.



Sounds like the plot of a Fawlty Towers episode - if I worked at the BBC I'd stick it on during the Top Gear slot to wind him up.


----------



## youngian (Mar 12, 2015)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...r-Beeb-wants-shot-Clarkson.html#ixzz3UA7Ocpco


> RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Too white. Too male. And too damned British. No wonder the Beeb wants shot of Clarkson


I've been enjoying the PC BBC wasting huge amounts money on programmes full of female black foreigners; Banished, Wolf Hall and Poldark are clear evidence of this trend.


----------



## Ms T (Mar 12, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Is an assistant producer on a TV show like _Top Gear_ a boss to contracted-in ‘talent’ like Clarkson, or an underling?


Lowest person on the production probably. Equivalent to a researcher. Definitely not Clarkson's boss.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

Ms T said:


> Lowest person on the production probably. Equivalent to a researcher. Definitely not Clarkson's boss.



The alleged punchee is listed as the (only) producer in the credits... Of course there are also assorted production managers, directors, a series producer etc. BBC roles are confusing. Not Clarkson's boss, but not the lowest rung.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

The boss is the executive producer. But then he'll have a boss too as it's the Beeb.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The boss is the executive producer. But then he'll have a boss too as it's the Beeb.


We, the people, are the real boss in twisted bbc liberal speak.


----------



## scifisam (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> People watch Top Gear because they do fun stuff. It's enjoyable after a few drinks. They chop up cars and turn them into other things. They drive fast cars that are quite cool to anyone interested in everything from engineering to moving quickly. Their production is good. They are also complete knobs, but this is probably only about 2% of the programme. Unless it's a special. The BBC broadcasts a lot of racist shit. Fuck, Stephen Fry's been known to come out with a 'hilarious' Nigerian accent on QI. It's a white m/c institution, Clarkson is just another wheel in it. He's not exceptional. I mean ffs there's a new (and completely shit) Matt Lucas vehicle on at the moment. Anyone remember 'Come fly with me'?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Agreed totally about the Beeb not exactly being a bastion of PC-ness. Also about Top Gear being enjoyable when it's not offensive, and it's rarely offensive.

But you don't know if that producer or any of the other staff were OK with Clarkson's behaviour. Maybe he hates the bastard but he needed the job. TV production is an extremely competitive field and, like you say, Top Gear is hardly the most racist show on the BBC.

I suspect the producer will cop more flak for this than Clarkson will.


----------



## spartacus mills (Mar 12, 2015)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Petition to allow people to assault colleagues at work reaches 400,000 signatures. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BringBackClarkson?src=hash">#BringBackClarkson</a></p>&mdash; HaveIGotNewsForYou (@haveigotnews) <a href="">March 11, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## spartacus mills (Mar 12, 2015)

<p><a href="https://twitter.com/haveigotnews">@haveigotnews</a> Everyone that signs that petition should be punched by their boss</p>&mdash; George Turner (@georgenturner) <a href="">March 11, 2015</a>


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

scifisam said:


> Agreed totally about the Beeb not exactly being a bastion of PC-ness. Also about Top Gear being enjoyable when it's not offensive, and it's rarely offensive.



That's the ironic thing, I think. From what I've seen of it, they could make the show and keep it just as popular without the offensive bits if they had the wit to do so. It's a bit of a collective failure of the show - the presenters, the production staff, everyone really -  that they haven't worked this out and done it. The only bit I can see that might be 'needed' to keep its current flavour would be to keep its measured disdain for environmental concerns. But even that's a bit of a Werner von Braun 'not my department' thing.


----------



## Ms T (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> The alleged punchee is listed as the (only) producer in the credits... Of course there are also assorted production managers, directors, a series producer etc. BBC roles are confusing. Not Clarkson's boss, but not the lowest rung.


He's an associate producer apparently. Different kettle of fish.


----------



## belboid (Mar 12, 2015)

laptop said:


> Are you *sure* about that?
> 
> If confidentiality clauses, for example, don't survive sacking for gross misconduct, then there's trouble ahead for many.
> 
> And since he was a contractor, not an employee, the contract can say pretty much what the BBC's lawyers want it to say - though Clarkson's lawyers will have been more of a match for them than most.


It will have been a fun, and expensive, few sessions drawing that contract up.

The key test of any ongoing covenant is always - sacked or not - reasonableness. If you have been sacked, without notice, then it would be an unreasonable restraint of trade to stop that person from seeking fair employment, especially because non competes will usually get enough of a pay off at the end of a contract to ensure they can afford not to compete for a while. Some of this may not apply to Clarkson given how close he was to the end of his contract anyway, and because he, apparently, would still up for a payoff even if he did commit gross misconduct!

With confidentiality, it's a bit more complicated.  It _may_ be reasonable to insist on sticking to the terms, but it may not be - which is why dismissals in those cases tend to end with Compromise Agreements rather than outright dismissals.

See (partly) Patsystems Holdings Limited v Neilly


If an employer is informed that an employee is going to join a competitor, care must be taken to ensure that the employee is managed correctly. An employer’s actions should not exacerbate the tensions to which these situations often give rise; *if the employer inadvertently breaches the employee’s contract of employment*, the covenants the employer was seeking to rely on will no longer be enforceable."


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

Breach of contract results in restrictive covenants falling away ie the whole contract is breached. But it's only breach of contract as far as I know - not dismissal for gross misconduct. However, having said that, a dismissal for gross misconduct is normally a summary dismissal ie without notice. So if he argues that it wasn't gross misconduct then he'd also be arguing wrongful dismissal (witholding notice pay in breach of contract, therefore the restrictive covenants falling away) so I imagine that would be the argument. An argument easily circumvented by the employer if the restrictive covenants are important by dismissing him procedurally ie with notice, because it seems he's already on a final written warning so the next sanction is normally dismissal.


----------



## gosub (Mar 12, 2015)

dendrite said:


> The rescue Jezza petition has now doubled, in one day, no more page 3's total for three years, and edged above the the one demanding IDS live on £53. I can't tell what to infer about the politics of it from the bare magnitude of support. These are five of the top liked ten or so reasons though:
> 
> _I pay my TV license to ensure that irreverent people can express themselves. If you become boarding and politically correct, you may disappear BBC.
> 
> ...


Ordinarily (and it has become Ordinarily)  I'd sort of agree, I do find Clarkson' s critics po faced and tedious. But you can't go round punching work colleagues. 

I'm sure he'll be happy on sky one where I can't watch him, and Chris Evans can inject new life into a format that was getting worn out


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> Breach of contract results in restrictive covenants falling away ie the whole contract is breached. But it's only breach of contract as far as I know - not dismissal for gross misconduct. However, having said that, a dismissal for gross misconduct is normally a summary dismissal ie without notice. So if he argues that it wasn't gross misconduct then he'd also be arguing wrongful dismissal (witholding notice pay in breach of contract, therefore the restrictive covenants falling away) so I imagine that would be the argument. An argument easily circumvented by the employer if the restrictive covenants are important by dismissing him procedurally ie with notice, because it seems he's already on a final written warning so the next sanction is normally dismissal.



But don't warnings lapse after a given time period?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

rumours that clarkson suspended by bbc sadly false


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 12, 2015)

That's a gret photo


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

spartacus mills said:


> <p><a href="https://twitter.com/haveigotnews">@haveigotnews</a> Everyone that signs that petition should be punched by their boss</p>&mdash; George Turner (@georgenturner) <a href="">March 11, 2015</a>



i am sure enough people already assaulted by their bosses without asking for more of that.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> But don't warnings lapse after a given time period?


They do, yes.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

Right, because I think he got it last year.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Right, because I think he got it last year.


They normally last 12 months but it depends on the organisation.


----------



## belboid (Mar 12, 2015)

his 'final warning' was given at the beginning of May last year, so would still be in date.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Right, because I think he got it last year.


he can't have got it last year because he'd not have become embroiled in a fracas this year if he had.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

scifisam said:


> Agreed totally about the Beeb not exactly being a bastion of PC-ness. Also about Top Gear being enjoyable when it's not offensive, and it's rarely offensive.
> 
> But you don't know if that producer or any of the other staff were OK with Clarkson's behaviour. Maybe he hates the bastard but he needed the job. TV production is an extremely competitive field and, like you say, Top Gear is hardly the most racist show on the BBC.
> 
> I suspect the producer will cop more flak for this than Clarkson will.



No, true enough... BBC roles are quite confusing. There are certainly some people in Top Gear who are complicit - that 'slope on a bridge' joke had to pass through various stages and someone thought H982 FKL would be hilarious, but this bloke may hate it.


----------



## gosub (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> No, true enough... BBC roles are quite confusing. There are certainly some people in Top Gear who are complicit - that 'slope on a bridge' joke had to pass through various stages and someone thought H982 FKL would be hilarious, but this bloke may hate it.


I think the nature of the 'joke' was slipping it past compliance like the swear words in the magazine column James May got fired for. And they managed it coz slope isn't really a known term of abuse here in UK. Hardly evidence of a hotbed of BNP propaganda


----------



## 8ball (Mar 12, 2015)

gosub said:


> I think the nature of the 'joke' was slipping it past compliance like the swear words in the magazine column James May got fired for. And they managed it coz slope isn't really a known term of abuse here in UK. Hardly evidence of a hotbed of BNP propaganda


 
They def slipped it past me.

Together with a good decade's worth of messages encoded into the license plates of many, many cars, no doubt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

gosub said:


> I think the nature of the 'joke' was slipping it past compliance like the swear words in the magazine column James May got fired for. And they managed it coz slope isn't really a known term of abuse here in UK. Hardly evidence of a hotbed of BNP propaganda


It's not used. It's known, though. From the movies and that. Otherwise the 'joke' wouldn't have worked.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not used. It's known, though. From the movies and that. Otherwise the 'joke' wouldn't have worked.


i think what you're trying to say is, you know it. it's not widely used is it: in this country more used to denote or indicate an incline generally topological. or -graphical.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

gosub said:


> I think the nature of the 'joke' was slipping it past compliance like the swear words in the magazine column James May got fired for. And they managed it coz slope isn't really a known term of abuse here in UK. Hardly evidence of a hotbed of BNP propaganda



I missed it until pointed out on here. That point wasn't about wider BBC racism though, it was about the Top Gear production team and the fact their are clearly a few senior people in it who think slipping the odd racist gag past the censors is highly amusing. I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i think what you're trying to say is, you know it. it's not widely used is it: in this country more used to denote or indicate an incline generally topological. or -graphical.


It was however a racial epithet directly aimed at someone they were filming and absolutely fucking disgraceful. Much worse than the 'oh look at me I almost said the 'n-word, aren't I a rebel' nonsense.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i think what you're trying to say is, you know it. it's not widely used is it: in this country more used to denote or indicate an incline generally topological. or -graphical.


I'm saying not only that I know it but that I reckon most people will know it - 'from the movies and that' - hence the 'joke' works. There are lots of terms of racial abuse that we may know but not use here -  'spook' is another that springs to mind that we will know from the movies and that.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


It's bully humour. The point is not to promote racism, the point is to have a dig at anyone who might object.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> I missed it until pointed out on here. That point wasn't about wider BBC racism though, it was about the Top Gear production team and the fact their are clearly a few senior people in it who think slipping the odd racist gag past the censors is highly amusing. I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


Not casual. Very calculated.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> I missed it until pointed out on here. That point wasn't about wider BBC racism though, it was about the Top Gear production team and the fact their are clearly a few senior people in it who think slipping the odd racist gag past the censors is highly amusing. I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


Of course it does. Do you think BBC employees are allowed to choose which production they are placed with?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm saying not only that I know it but that I reckon most people will know it - 'from the movies and that' - hence the 'joke' works. There are lots of terms of racial abuse that we may know but not use here -  'spook' is another that springs to mind that we will know from the movies and that.


so what you're saying is that you believe most people share the same cultural background as you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you're saying is that you believe most people share the same cultural background as you.


Most people watch _more_ American films than me, if anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people watch _more_ American films than me, if anything.


alright, name a few of these films that most people watch then.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Die Hard


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Die Hard 2 - Die Harder


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

They managed to slip it past me, which isn't surprising given I never watch Top Gear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Santino said:


> Die Hard


i didn't know you also posted under the name littlebabyjesus.

put it in context for me, giving an example of dialogue.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Die Hard 3: Die Hard With A Vengeance


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people watch _more_ American films than me, if anything.


This isn't radio 4 you know.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> alright, name a few of these films that most people watch then.


Platoon. Full Metal Jacket.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Die Hard 4.0: Live Free or Die Hard


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Santino said:


> Die Hard 3: Die Hard With A Vengeance


which part of 'put it in context for me' are you struggling with?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> Platoon. Full Metal Jacket.


yes. put it in context for me.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Die Hard 5: A Good Day To Die Hard


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Santino said:


> Die Hard 5: A Good Day To Die Hard


littlebabyjesus is lucky to have such good friends who post up film names but providing no evidence of the word appearing in them at all.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> which part of 'put it in context for me' are you struggling with?


'me' - I find the very concept of personal identity across time very troubling.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 12, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> This isn't radio 4 you know.


You wading in with pickman's nonsense now? 

Poor.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm saying not only that I know it but that I reckon most people will know it - 'from the movies and that' - hence the 'joke' works. There are lots of terms of racial abuse that we may know but not use here -  'spook' is another that springs to mind that we will know from the movies and that.



'Spook' we know because there was a long running, popular, recent programme called 'spooks'. Plenty of people missed the 'Slope' thing.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> littlebabyjesus is lucky to have such good friends who post up film names but providing no evidence of the word appearing in them at all.


I never said these films had any word appearing in them. I think some of them do have words in. Possibly as many as 50.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

What does "slope" mean and what's the significance of that number plate?


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> 'Spook' we know because there was a long running, popular, recent programme called 'spooks'. Plenty of people missed the 'Slope' thing.


'Spook' was used as a term of abuse in Back To The Future.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You wading in with pickman's nonsense now?
> 
> Poor.


FFs a passing joke about cultural snobbery/anti-amerianism and the evil liberal BBC in line with my single other post on the thread about the evil liberal bbc.


----------



## Santino (Mar 12, 2015)

Santino said:


> 'Spook' was used as a term of abuse in Back To The Future.


 And possibly also Back to the Future 2: Back Harder, although it was technically the same use as the first film.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> What does "slope" mean


(Aus, UK, and US) a person of Asian (in Australia, especially Vietnamese; in America, especially Chinese) descent.


----------



## gosub (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> I missed it until pointed out on here. That point wasn't about wider BBC racism though, it was about the Top Gear production team and the fact their are clearly a few senior people in it who think slipping the odd racist gag past the censors is highly amusing. I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


No, as I said I think the joke was an internal one on and about BBC management systems.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> (Aus, UK, and US) a person of Asian (in Australia, especially Vietnamese; in America, especially Chinese) descent.


Cheers, not heard that before.


----------



## Cid (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> What does "slope" mean and what's the significance of that number plate?



H982 FKL - they did a road trip through Argentina with it. Falklands war was 1982. They claim coincidence. Whether it was or not it resulted in everything kicking off a bit. Swift google reveals they knew the numberplate before buying, maybe they didn't click that it was significant. Maybe they did.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

gosub said:


> No, as I said I think the joke was an internal one on and about BBC management systems.


Relying on there being the social existence of a racially abusive term - whether archaic or in current use. And when placed next to their attempts to place live racist abuse past the censors to suggest there was no racial motivation and it was just management ribbing is beyond naive.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> Cheers, not heard that before.


It's common in Philip K. Dick novels which was where I first came across it.

It definitely features in Pulp Fiction during Christopher Walken's monologue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You wading in with pickman's nonsense now?
> 
> Poor.


so what you're saying is 'i was talking shit when i made an assertion i could not substantiate'. thank you for the admission.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> It's common in Philip K. Dick novels which was where I first came across it.
> 
> It definitely features in Pulp Fiction during Christopher Walken's monologue.


Ah, OK. Don't know why that one has passed me by, but it has. I've not heard it used in conversation.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> H982 FKL - they did a road trip through Argentina with it. Falklands war was 1982. They claim coincidence. Whether it was or not it resulted in everything kicking off a bit. Swift google reveals they knew the numberplate before buying, maybe they didn't click that it was significant. Maybe they did.


Oh, I see, cheers


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> Ah, OK. Don't know why that one has passed me by, but it has. I've not heard it used in conversation.


You should be a 50+ old posh white bloke then.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you're saying is 'i was talking shit when i made an assertion i could not substantiate'. thank you for the admission.


I reckon most people have seen Pulp Fiction (almost everyone of my acquaintance has) but it's hard to prove, how do you find out what proportion of the UK population have seen a particular film?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> I missed it until pointed out on here. That point wasn't about wider BBC racism though, it was about the Top Gear production team and the fact their are clearly a few senior people in it who think slipping the odd racist gag past the censors is highly amusing. I don't think it's a hotbed of BNP propaganda either - it just has a streak of casual racism running through it.


censors?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> I reckon most people have seen Pulp Fiction (almost everyone of my acquaintance has) but it's hard to prove, how do you find out what proportion of the UK population have seen a particular film?


not my problem, i didn't make the claim: ask littlebabyjesus.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> You should be a 50+ old posh white bloke then.


Tbf, the age and colour are right


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> Tbf, the age and colour are right


It might be a private school thing - at least 66% of the presenters being private school. I suspect the real figure is 75%.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It might be a private school thing - at least 66% of the presenters being private school. I suspect the real figure is 75%.


Yeah and I notice the HUGE FUSS about this, when they can sack women presenters for not doing anything apart from aging


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

cesare said:


> Cheers, not heard that before.



Slopey eyes. It's generally 'chink' in the uk.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Slopey eyes. It's generally 'chink' in the uk.


Oh! I actually "get" it now  Christ I'm being thick today.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Slopey eyes. It's generally 'chink' in the uk.


The reference is the perceived 'sloping foreheads' of East asians I believe. Hence 'slopehead'.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

Oh right I thought it was the eyes.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> The reference is the perceived 'sloping foreheads' of East asians I believe. Hence 'slopehead'.


Maybe in the US - over here it's japanse and war related and slope-eyed.


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe in the US - over here it's japanse and war related and slope-eyed.


Only time I ever heard it over here was at school when there was a fad for Vietnam war films. My Chinese wife, who's heard all the other racist words had never heard that one till 10 minutes ago.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 12, 2015)

See also: slanty-eyed


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> Only time I ever heard it over here was at school when there was a fad for Vietnam war films. My Chinese wife, who's heard all the other racist words had never heard that one till 10 minutes ago.


_During the war _types always used it when i was growing up._ Yes, yes, you were in burma and can take your eye out and put it in your pint. I've seen you do it already!_


----------



## maomao (Mar 12, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> _During the war _types always used it when i was growing up._ Yes, yes, you were in burma and can take your eye out and put it in your pint. I've seen you do it already!_


Only old bloke I knew who'd been in Burma was still too fucked up to talk about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2015)

maomao said:


> Only old bloke I knew who'd been in Burma was still too fucked up to talk about it.


That went for tens, if not hundreds of thousands of men i think.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 12, 2015)

Cid said:


> H982 FKL - they did a road trip through Argentina with it. Falklands war was 1982. They claim coincidence. Whether it was or not it resulted in everything kicking off a bit. Swift google reveals they knew the numberplate before buying, maybe they didn't click that it was significant. Maybe they did.




Like fuck did they buy that car with that plate.

Any guesses as to the highest ranking officer a VC went to in the South Atlantic was?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 12, 2015)

Clarkson is a journalist, words are his craft. He knows full well what he's doing with his brushes with racism, he knows full well how powerful words can be and yet chooses to keep pushing the boundaries like some silly schoolboy. What he doesn't stop to consider is what the effect his carefully crafted bollocks has on those not so skilled* as he.

*born with a fucking silver spoon in his fat, ugly mouth.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 12, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Like fuck did they buy that car with that plate.



Looks like they did. Stick the plate number in here https://www.vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/

That number was assigned to a Porsche in 1991.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 12, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Looks like they did. Stick the plate number in here https://www.vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/
> 
> That number was assigned to a Porsche in 1991.



That's as maybe, but I still contend they didn't just happen across _that Porsche_ with _that plate_ by chance;

Argentine special
982 - year of conflict
FKL - well?
H - Colonel H Jones, know to all as "H"

No-Fucking-Way


----------



## laptop (Mar 12, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Looks like they did. Stick the plate number in here https://www.vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/
> 
> That number was assigned to a Porsche in 1991.





> The BBC knew about a Porsche’s controversial Falklands number plate before buying it and shipping it to Argentina for a Top Gear special, the _Telegraph..._ learnt.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...ds-Porsche-number-plate-before-buying-it.html



Implication: they bought the car in order to get the plate. The usual way of getting a specific plate, as I understand it.

Interesting search facility though


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 12, 2015)

Here's Clarkson in a more appropriate car...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Here's Clarkson in a more appropriate car...
> 
> View attachment 68720








and we all look forward to seeing him in one of these.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That's as maybe, but I still contend they didn't just happen across _that Porsche_ with _that plate_ by chance;
> 
> Argentine special
> 982 - year of conflict
> ...


it's all a bit nostradamus as far as i'm concerned.


----------



## Mogden (Mar 12, 2015)

Popbitch reports " It's not just physical abuse Clarkson doled out. The words used are said to be something along the lines of "Where's our hot food, you lazy fucking Irish cunt?"

And was apparently pissed on rose wine.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Popbitch reports " It's not just physical abuse Clarkson doled out. The words used
> are said to be something along the lines of "Where's our hot food, you lazy fucking Irish cunt?"
> 
> And was apparently pissed on rose wine.


pissed on rose wine? your p45 is in the post.


----------



## Mogden (Mar 12, 2015)

Popbitch does the usual bullet points of his past dubious behaviours as well and speaks of vitamin B injections to sober up the trio after a night on the ale so as not to waste a day of filming.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 12, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Popbitch does the usual bullet points of his past dubious behaviours as well and speaks of vitamin B injections to sober up the trio after a night on the ale so as not to waste a day of filming.


Link?


----------



## Mogden (Mar 12, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Link?


Not updated on the Popbitch website yet,  only in the mailout but as it's you bees, I've taken a screenshot.







As it is implied, this is the second part of the JC special in that mail but I figure you can subscribe ; P


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 12, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Popbitch reports " It's not just physical abuse Clarkson doled out. The words used are said to be something along the lines of "Where's our hot food, you lazy fucking Irish cunt?"
> 
> And was apparently pissed on rose wine.




if thats true, then is is proper fucked


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2015)

i see that 840,000 apparently signed petition asking bbc not to sack jc.

where's the petition demanding the bbc take action and sack the cunt?


----------



## Dan U (Mar 13, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i see that 840,000 apparently signed petition asking bbc not to sack jc.
> 
> where's the petition demanding the bbc take action and sack the cunt?


Saw one from last time that was on about 15000 signatures


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Saw one from last time that was on about 15000 signatures


we need a new and better one and one with 841,000 signatures on


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 13, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i see that 840,000 apparently signed petition asking bbc not to sack jc.
> 
> where's the petition demanding the bbc take action and sack the cunt?


The real headline is: 

63,260,000 people fail to sign Clarkson petition. 

Vast majority want the abusive boss sacked for workplace violence, threats and racist insults.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 13, 2015)




----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 13, 2015)

"I am the Alpha male" screamed Clarkson, defecating in his hand and hurling the results through the bars of his cage.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 13, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Popbitch reports " It's not just physical abuse Clarkson doled out. The words used are said to be something along the lines of *"Where's our hot food, you lazy fucking Irish cunt?"*





Proof of this would be massively appreciated ...


----------



## starfish (Mar 14, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> He's Nick Ferrari on TV. Being paid to be offensive, lauding in that.


I did ponder youre post at first because its all scripted, Top Gear, that is & surely the beeb wouldnt condone that behaviour but then again they did pay Jim Davidson for years. I do like Top Gear but have gone off it recently as its a bit staid & theyre pandering to the help for heroes brigade. I still like flash cars though.


----------



## MrSki (Mar 14, 2015)

Sorry if posted before.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 14, 2015)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-clarkson-called-top-gear-5330155

*Jeremy Clarkson called Top Gear producer Oisin Tymon 'a lazy Irish cunt,' BBC probe will be told.*


----------



## peterkro (Mar 14, 2015)

Popbitch and Clarkson's punch up goes way back.He's always referred to as C****son on PB because his lawyers threatened to bankrupt them if his name ever appeared again on its board.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 14, 2015)

I think Clarkson is probably finished at the BBC. What that means for TopGear is less clear, probably quite possible is if he is not retained Hammond and May may also not extend their contracts which would leave the BBC looking for 3 new presenters to continue the program. I don't know if Guy Martin is available  there are people out there who could present it but whether they will be as popular as this trio only time will tell.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 14, 2015)

Definite hints about this being the end of the road for him at the BBC:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/20...may-leave-top-gear-sun-column-producer-fracas


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 14, 2015)

So sad that he'll be thrown on the scrap heap end up being paid more with an independent producer. All the talk is of whether he'll be keeping his job. Given he's supposedly assaulted someone, why aren't the police investigating him?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 14, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So sad that he'll be thrown on the scrap heap end up being paid more with an independent producer. All the talk is of whether he'll be keeping his job. Given he's supposedly assaulted someone, why aren't the police investigating him?


Doesn't someone (the producer probably) have to make a complaint for that to happen?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 14, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Doesn't someone (the producer probably) have to make a complaint for that to happen?



Well apparently it ended with a visit to the hospital and I'm sure the police are aware of what is being reported. They investigate plenty of other stuff based on things that appear in the press.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 14, 2015)

According to this Torygraph link, Tymon has contacted his lawyers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...nched-producer-and-called-him-lazy-Irish.html



> The producer, who has received abuse on social media following *Clarkson’s suspension**,* including violent threats, has consulted lawyers over the incident.
> 
> Slater and Gordon solicitors said: “We are assisting Oisin Tymon in relation to incidents occurring during his employment at the BBC.”


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 14, 2015)

William of Walworth said:


> Proof of this would be massively appreciated ...


http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-clarkson-called-top-gear-5330155

Ask Nicola Methven if her source is trustworthy: @mirrormeths


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 14, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Given he's supposedly assaulted someone, why aren't the police investigating him?



Because a positive answer to the "Do you like Top Gear Y/N?" question is pretty much the sole entrance requirement for our national police force. (Well, that, and a penchant for lying).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 14, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well apparently it ended with a visit to the hospital and I'm sure the police are aware of what is being reported. They investigate plenty of other stuff based on things that appear in the press.


Call me greedy, but I'd be after a big payoff from the multi-millionaire thug. Fuck it, make some money from this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

Mr.Bishie said:


> According to this Torygraph link, Tymon has contacted his lawyers.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...nched-producer-and-called-him-lazy-Irish.html


lets hope he takes clarkeson for a few quids


----------



## Mogden (Mar 14, 2015)

In trying to find a definitive answer for what was said or done I found this 

https://m.facebook.com/BoltonLibrar...732493220366/1072413339452272/?type=1&theater


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 14, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Call me greedy, but I'd be after a big payoff from the multi-millionaire thug. Fuck it, make some money from this.



I agree, but it does feel somehow unsatisfying.  At best, he's still not going to get more than Clarkson could easily drop down the back of a sofa and not miss.  Can judges not award something that's going to be more humiliating and take away his smug alpha-maleness - force him to cycle everywhere for two years, for example?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

I bet it was that manky Matteus stuff you get in the novelty shaped bottles too


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 14, 2015)

billy_bob said:


> I agree, but it does feel somehow unsatisfying.  At best, he's still not going to get more than Clarkson could easily drop down the back of a sofa and not miss.  Can judges not award something that's going to be more humiliating and take away his smug alpha-maleness - force him to cycle everywhere for two years, for example?


Yeah but I'd be thinking selfishly at this point if I were him. tbh I'd love it if some multi-millionaire celeb xenophobically abused me for no reason then lamped me one in front of a load of witnesses.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

once the little birds stop flying round your head your eyes would light up with pound signs.

Not that I imagine Mt Tymon, as a producer on Top Gear, is short of a few quids anyway. But the principle


----------



## gosub (Mar 14, 2015)

I think Mr Tymon is behaving impeccably, during what must be a week from hell.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 14, 2015)

Wouldn't it be the BBC that got sued and not Clarkson, given they're the employer? And that could cause anyone severe future employment issues.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 14, 2015)

Arm in a sling. Eye patch. And a great big sad-face. I've been having nightmares, replaying it again and again. That face growling at me. THAT FACE. 

'I dream of Jeremy Clarkson's face every night'. That's got to be 100k right there.

A quid for every name on that ridiculous petition.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 14, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Wouldn't it be the BBC that got sued and not Clarkson, given they're the employer? And that could cause anyone severe future employment issues.


Sue them both.


----------



## The Boy (Mar 14, 2015)

Mr.Bishie said:


> According to this Torygraph link, Tymon has contacted his lawyers.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...nched-producer-and-called-him-lazy-Irish.html



Aren't Slater & Gordon a mob of ambulance chasers of the sort who advertise during Countdown and on the higher numbered cable channels?  Doubt anything significant will come of it beyond a cheque of some sort.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Arm in a sling. Eye patch. And a great big sad-face. I've been having nightmares, replaying it again and again. That face growling at me. THAT FACE.
> 
> 'I dream of Jeremy Clarkson's face every night'. That's got to be 100k right there.
> 
> A quid for every name on that ridiculous petition.




would an NHS metal cane be over egging it I wonder.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

gosub said:


> I think Mr Tymon is behaving impeccably, during what must be a week from hell.


and once the legal bizz is out of the way he can get a few quid from the press for his story. Did I say story- I meant ordeal


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

anyway to be serious for a mo, it was clearly a pissed middle aged hasn't fought since the playground slap. The abuse for being irish however, can't be pleasant at all.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 14, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> The real headline is:
> 
> 63,260,000 people fail to sign Clarkson petition.



The Government needs to move fast on these results and pass laws mandating that everyone wear clown shoes and only eat tuna sandwiches and vitamin pills.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 14, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That's as maybe, but I still contend they didn't just happen across _that Porsche_ with _that plate_ by chance;
> 
> Argentine special
> 982 - year of conflict
> ...



You really need to read _The Bible Code_ - it'll blow your mind wide open, man.

<takes big hit on bong>


----------



## 8ball (Mar 14, 2015)

...it's just occurred to me that Clarkson is a shoe-in for a part in the current series of _Snickers_ commercials...


----------



## Mogden (Mar 14, 2015)

8ball said:


> ...it's just occurred to me that Clarkson is a shoe-in for a part in the current series of _Snickers_ commercials...


Have we had this pic on this thread yet?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 14, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Have we had this pic on this thread yet?



Not surprised someone got to it first tbf.


----------



## Mogden (Mar 14, 2015)

The thing is it is still not clear exactly what he did. There's a lengthy Sky article about a family who witnessed his tirade and it seems it was verbally abusive but there was nothing physical but other sources suggest he punched the chap and he was hospital bound for a short while.

I like what Clarkson does. He's good at his job. I don't like him. I like some U2 songs so it shows Bono can be good at his job but that doesn't mean I like the smarmy suck up bastard. What does piss me off though is bullies who get away with things because of the people they know.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 14, 2015)

Mogden said:


> What does piss me off though is bullies who get away with things because of the people they know.



Feedback forum ------------------------------------------------------->


----------



## Mogden (Mar 14, 2015)

8ball said:


> Feedback forum ------------------------------------------------------->


*cries*

Don't drag me into that, purrleeaasee! 

Let's face it Clarkson is bored. And there's been some suggestion that in fact he reported the incident to his boss as a means to leave the BBC as the producer had reported nothing to his superiors.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 14, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> No offence to you but that is well patronising.


Depends on the perspective of the person saying it. Top-down, middle or upper class pronouncing on the working class = patronising. Working class person reflecting on what actually happens - i.e. media conforms to the views of the powerful, and puts out propaganda that snares some people = not patronising.


----------



## Tankus (Mar 14, 2015)

Or it just was one of his scheduled pre season outrage media runs ,just brought forward...

Bit more cynical now that I've heard that it was him who reported it to his superiors that loath him 

Meh !


----------



## Mogden (Mar 14, 2015)

Well it's all hearsay isn't it.  He could have rogered May while blowing the Hamster and we'd be none the wiser.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2015)

now theres an image that will haunt my darkest hours


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 14, 2015)

8ball said:


> ...it's just occurred to me that Clarkson is a shoe-in for a part in the current series of _Snickers_ commercials...



You mean he'd go around treating people with respect and dignity, to general bemusement, before eating a snickers and getting reassuringly back to sneering boorishly at anyone he (mistakenly) thinks is a lesser being than himself?


----------



## laptop (Mar 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> anyway to be serious for a mo, it was clearly a pissed middle aged hasn't fought since the playground slap. The abuse for being irish however, can't be pleasant at all.





> The BBC producer allegedly punched by Jeremy Clarkson has claimed the “drunk” Top Gear presenter’s actions have ruined his life.
> 
> Shattered Oisin Tymon has been in hiding after becoming the target of death threats since the “fracas”.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-clarkson-top-gear-producer-5336934



Is Sunday _People_ cover story (too):


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 15, 2015)

why are they scare quoting fracas. Its not denied that a contretemps took place


----------



## rekil (Mar 15, 2015)

"Deranged middle-aged divorcee cult issues fatwa against me" is how I would've played it too I reckon.


----------



## laptop (Mar 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> why are they scare quoting fracas. Its not denied that a contretemps took place



Could it be a reverse-scare-quote? In other words "fracas" = "heinous assault"? 

Either that, or there's the remaining possibility of denial...


----------



## J Ed (Mar 15, 2015)

copliker said:


> "Deranged middle-aged divorcee cult issues fatwa against me" is how I would've played it too I reckon.



It's probably true, MRA twitter jihadists are v petty and stupid


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 15, 2015)

The Mail have seen fit to run a "Clarkson - worse than Savile" front page


----------



## rekil (Mar 15, 2015)

J Ed said:


> It's probably true, MRA twitter jihadists are v petty and stupid


Imagine how much of a ruin your life would have to be to become so emotionally invested in the fate of someone like Clarkson.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 15, 2015)

Mogden said:


> Well it's all hearsay isn't it.  He could have rogered May while blowing the Hamster and we'd be none the wiser.



Oh god, don't. You'll get moomoo all hot under the collar.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 15, 2015)

you just know there is topgear slashfic out there. I'm not googling it. But it must exist because internet


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> you just know there is topgear slashfic out there. I'm not googling it. But it must exist because internet


You know that Rule 34 is "there is porn of everything, and if there isn't, you must write it?"


----------



## Favelado (Mar 15, 2015)

http://sabotagetimes.com/life/the-distressing-world-of-erotic-top-gear-fan-fiction/

*"The Distressing World of Erotic Top Gear Fan Fiction"





			Hammond’s Darkest Hour

The two men stood grimly over the hospital bed and looked down at their battered, broken presenter friend. The beep, beep of the heart machine was the only sound that could be heard, until Clarkson spoke.
“What was he doing in that bloody rocket car?” He said, almost in anger.
“He was reckless. A maverick,” May said. “I tried to stop him. No one could stop him.”
“Well his fast driving days might be over,” Jeremy said tenderly, brushing the back of his wrist along the heavily bandaged brow of his pal.
“Tragedy,” May sighed. “He loved to drive fast. All we can do now is wait. Hopefully this coma will wear off soon. There’s nothing we can do.”
A glint of daring entered Clarkson’s eyes.
“There’s one thing we haven’t tried,” He said, approaching the bed and loosening the waistband on his jogging bottoms. “To cure a maverick, we have to think like a maverick. A sexual maverick.”
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 15, 2015)

Favelado said:


> http://sabotagetimes.com/life/the-distressing-world-of-erotic-top-gear-fan-fiction/
> 
> *"The Distressing World of Erotic Top Gear Fan Fiction"
> 
> ...


You're saved, DotCommunist


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 15, 2015)

fuck the internet


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 15, 2015)

its like they spit in the eye of god


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> its like they spit in the eye of god


Are you Rule 34ing again?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 15, 2015)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 15, 2015)

laptop said:


> Is Sunday _People_ cover story (too):


The dilemma about cashing in on this shit. You have to make yourself look ridiculous too.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 15, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> you just know there is topgear slashfic out there. I'm not googling it. But it must exist because internet



I'd look, but I still struggle with memories of Severus Snape and the Tellietubbies.

Not to mention the Scooby Doo stuff.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 15, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> I'd look, but I still struggle with memories of Severus Snape and the Tellietubbies.
> 
> Not to mention the Scooby Doo stuff.



The.... Scooby Doo stuff?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 15, 2015)

Meh, Scooby Doo is pretty much mainstream now, particularly Daphne/Velma.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 15, 2015)

Favelado said:


> The.... Scooby Doo stuff?



Don't say I didn't warn you:

Teletubbies: http://www.reddit.com/r/WhatTheFanf...rus_snape_professor_and_lover_in_which_snape/

Scooby Doo: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/5915590/1/Scooby-Doo-and-the-Trip-of-Lust


----------



## laptop (Mar 15, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> Scooby Doo: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/5915590/1/Scooby-Doo-and-the-Trip-of-Lust



Where can I get this anti-spell-check software so I can look, like, down wit da stoppidz?


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 15, 2015)

laptop said:


> Where can I get this anti-spell-check software so I can look, like, down wit da stoppidz?



Dunno. I'm hoping it's anti-spell check software and they haven't really taken enough drugs that their scribblings began making sense.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 15, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> Don't say I didn't warn you:
> 
> Teletubbies: http://www.reddit.com/r/WhatTheFanf...rus_snape_professor_and_lover_in_which_snape/
> 
> Scooby Doo: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/5915590/1/Scooby-Doo-and-the-Trip-of-Lust



The Teletubbies one I already knew and had furiously beaten myself off to on countless occasions. 

The Scooby one is new to me and is even better. If the words "Velma's moronic vagina" don't get you going, there's something seriously wrong with you.


----------



## sim667 (Mar 18, 2015)

Has this been posted yet?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 18, 2015)

It has. I don't get it though as I've never seen the advert.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It has. I don't get it though as I've never seen the advert.


The advert is Joan Collins shouting at a bloke who gives her a snickers to get some food in her Joan then morphs back into the calm friend and the strapline is "You're Not You When You Are Hungry"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It has. I don't get it though as I've never seen the advert.


get some nuts


----------



## weltweit (Mar 18, 2015)

I hear Clarkson is going to have a go at the BBC for the comparisons made between him and Savile.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I hear Clarkson is going to have a go at the BBC for the comparisons made between him and Savile.


What comparisons?


----------



## The Octagon (Mar 18, 2015)

Favelado said:


> http://sabotagetimes.com/life/the-distressing-world-of-erotic-top-gear-fan-fiction/
> 
> *"The Distressing World of Erotic Top Gear Fan Fiction"
> 
> *



That's enough internet for one day I think


----------



## weltweit (Mar 18, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> What comparisons?


It was reported that a senior source at the BBC said Clarkson was like Savile.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It was reported that a senior source at the BBC said Clarkson was like Savile.



It's just a joke, you know, like the jokes on Top Gear.


----------



## T & P (Mar 18, 2015)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2015)

T & P said:


>


that's the world's smallest double bass.

as you'll note here





the violin has a chin rest


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 18, 2015)

Favelado said:


> It's just a joke, you know, like the jokes on Top Gear.





T & P said:


>



They don't like it up 'em.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 18, 2015)

tbf it wasn't just Clarkson who was annoyed or upset by the comparison to Savile, some of Savile's victims and their families were not too impressed either.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> tbf it wasn't just Clarkson who was annoyed or upset by the comparison to Savile, some of Savile's victims and their families were not too impressed either.



The BBC bosses who seem prepared to tolerate bad (though not as evil as Saville's) behaviour from Clarkson do deserve comparison with their predecessors from the Department of Turning a Blind Eye.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 18, 2015)

Favelado said:


> It's just a joke, you know, like the jokes on Top Gear.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 18, 2015)

961,627 supporters
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-reinstate-jeremy-clarkson


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Mar 18, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> They don't like it up 'em.


to be fair I doubt a violin that small would cause many problems


----------



## T & P (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> tbf it wasn't just Clarkson who was annoyed or upset by the comparison to Savile, some of Savile's victims and their families were not too impressed either.


I suspect Savile himself might be turning on his grave at being compared to Clarkson, tbf...


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 18, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> What comparisons?



Seemingly Clarkson's supporters, including Cameron, are expecting the BBC to turn a blind eye to Clarkson's antics which has echoes of the Jimmy Savile stuff. This view from an exec got leaked and now it's being twisted into 'BBC compares Clarkson with Savile!!!!!!'


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> tbf it wasn't just Clarkson who was annoyed or upset by the comparison to Savile, some of Savile's victims and their families were not too impressed either.



Which is ridiculous; if anything they should be supporting the BBC for ensuring their big names will be held accountable for their actions from now on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Seemingly Clarkson's supporters, including Cameron, are expecting the BBC to turn a blind eye to Clarkson's antics which has echoes of the Jimmy Savile stuff. This view from an exec got leaked and now it's being twisted into 'BBC compares Clarkson with Savile!!!!!!'


good for the bbc savile's croaked or no doubt he'd be instructing lawyers too. what, a decent nonce like him being compared with a racist twat like clarkson? he'd never live it down.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> The advert is Joan Collins shouting at a bloke who gives her a snickers to get some food in her Joan then morphs back into the calm friend and the strapline is "You're Not You When You Are Hungry"


The joke doesn't work though, because nobody is saying Clarkson acted out of character. Indeed, the story goes that many of the staff had gone to bed, expecting trouble. 

_In esuries veritas._


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 18, 2015)

He could have got a steak pizza from dominoes delivered like every other pisshead.


----------



## J Ed (Mar 20, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> He could have got a steak pizza from dominoes delivered like every other pisshead.



Not posh enough for this man of the people, he does live opposite the PM you know


----------



## J Ed (Mar 20, 2015)

Typical Tory behaviour, won't accept any of the consequences of his behaviour, always someone else's fault

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/20/jeremy-clarkson-foul-mouthed-rant-bbc-top-gear



> Jeremy Clarkson has launched into a four-letter tirade against BBC bosses, labelling them “fucking bastards” following his suspension from Top Gear.
> 
> Clarkson hinted that he expected to be sacked as a result of the internal investigation into an alleged fracas with a programme producer which will report next week.
> 
> ...


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 20, 2015)

Jeremy Clarkson: Richard Hammond and James May 'rejected offer to continue as presenters on Top Gear without suspended co-host'

Hardly surprising - if they went it alone, or with a JC replacement, people would blame them when the ratings decline.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 20, 2015)

im surprised how this is polarising people, when it really is such a fucking wanky insignificant issue

the way things are going with teh polls, a policy statement in an eleceion manifesto requiring the reinstatement of clarkson would probebely secure enough votes to secure a majority in the next parliament


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 20, 2015)

"Stig" has just turned up outside broadcasting house on a fucking _tank_ to deliver a petition demanding Clarkson's reinstatement.....


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> "Stig" has just turned up outside broadcasting house on a fucking _tank_ to deliver a petition demanding Clarkson's reinstatement.....





> *Tom Davies* retweeted
> 
> 
> *-* ‏@*twlldun*  18m18 minutes ago
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> "Stig" has just turned up outside broadcasting house on a fucking _tank_ to deliver a petition demanding Clarkson's reinstatement.....


not Stig?


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not Stig?



Nor 



Spoiler: Stig


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 20, 2015)

Who knows the Stig's true identity?

More to the point, who cares....


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> Who knows the Stig's true identity?
> 
> More to the point, who cares....


the tank hire people will.


----------



## laptop (Mar 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the tank hire people will.



Staines will have put it on his card. But, yes, he'll have had to specify who was driving... truthfully...


----------



## Dandred (Mar 20, 2015)

I think the guy is cunt, but then again I think the same of the BBC. 

I'm surprised two examples of the British middle class have got 18 pages on Urban...... 

Actually, I'm not.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 20, 2015)

You think Top Gear is a 'middle class' show? 

What tosh.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 20, 2015)

The Stig does not appear to be driving in this pic, however. 

_Thus, his secret identity is protected._

(NB, like the bold Clarkson himself, this is a grown adult we are talking about here).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> (NB, like the bold Clarkson himself, this is a grown adult we are talking about here).


looks like one of those japanese robots.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 20, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> looks like one of those japanese robots.



Has Clarkson joined the singularity and downloaded his brain into a robot?

It would be foolish not to speculate.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 20, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You think Top Gear is a 'middle class' show?
> 
> What tosh.



Working class show. 

Who can afford the cars? Is it just for window shopping?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 20, 2015)

Dandred said:


> Is it just for window shopping?


For most viewers, I would think so, yes.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 20, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> For most viewers, I would think so, yes.



I wouldn't classify the BBC or Clarkson as anything other than middle class. Which was what I said in the post you quoted.

Maybe read it again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 20, 2015)

But is _watching_ the BBC middle class?

If not, I fail to see your point.

And reading it again, it reads as it did the first time - a feeble attempt to have a pop at urban as a middle class place. A piece of prolier-than-thou pontification.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 20, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But is _watching_ the BBC middle class?
> 
> If not, I fail to see your point.
> 
> And reading it again, it reads as it did the first time - a feeble attempt to have a pop at urban as a middle class place.



I said the BBC and Clarkson were middle class.

Urban is middle class isn't it?


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 20, 2015)

Dandred said:


> Working class show.
> 
> Who can afford the cars? Is it just for window shopping?


No one but the very wealthy could even contemplate buying many of the cars shown on Top Gear, but then it's not been a "consumer" show for well over 10 years now.

I expect a large proportion of its viewers are average punters with suped-up Novas who dream of owning Ferraris and enjoy the vicarious experience of watching a fellow "lad" drive sports cars fast around a track.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 20, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> I expect a large proportion of its viewers are average punters with suped-up Novas who dream of owning Ferraris and enjoy the vicarious experience of watching a fellow "lad" drive sports cars fast around a track.



Clarkson, multimillionaire, lad of the people!


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 20, 2015)

Dandred said:


> Clarkson, multimillionaire, lad of the people!


Erm, yes we get it, he's rich...

Are you naturally disingenuous?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 20, 2015)

Who paid for the fucking tank? This Is starting to look more and more like a fucking stunt.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 20, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Who paid for the fucking tank? This Is starting to look more and more like a fucking stunt.


note when them anarcho outfit- space pirates or something- tried the same there was confiscation and police hassle. And stigs doing a protest with his head covered. lol.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 20, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> note when them anarcho outfit- space pirates or something- tried the same there was confiscation and police hassle. And stigs doing a protest with his head covered. lol.



I'm nicking that.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 20, 2015)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 20, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> ...space pirates or something...


Space Hijackers?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Space Hijackers?


Thats them! they drove a makeshift vehicle of a military nature to a protest and the police confiscated it.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 20, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> Thats them! they drove a makeshift vehicle of a military nature to a protest and the police confiscated it.


Was it confiscated? Certainly eleven people were arrested, the CPS subsequently dropped the charges, and a tidy bit of bunce had to be paid out for the inconvenience - but what happened to the motor?


----------



## gosub (Mar 20, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> No one but the very wealthy could even contemplate buying many of the cars shown on Top Gear, but then it's not been a "consumer" show for well over 10 years now.
> 
> I expect a large proportion of its viewers are average punters with suped-up Novas who dream of owning Ferraris and enjoy the vicarious experience of watching a fellow "lad" drive sports cars fast around a track.



In my local pub, if there is a nerdy top trumps conversation about cars it is always the same two people, 1 a barman who hasn't passed his test, the other a bloke who can't stay sober long enough to pass a piss test to get his license back.  

As pretty as some of the cars may be, you can't park them anywhere for fear of theft or vandalism which does render them a bit useless as a mode of transport


----------



## andrewc (Mar 20, 2015)

DaveCinzano said:


> Was it confiscated? Certainly eleven people were arrested, the CPS subsequently dropped the charges, and a tidy bit of bunce had to be paid out for the inconvenience - but what happened to the motor?



A Saracen APC , it was eventually returned, but in very poor condition,  hatches left open so the rain could get in, that sort of stuff.  (according to a mate who was one of the eleven).


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 20, 2015)

(‘Liked’ for the update, not the vandalism, etc.)


----------



## weltweit (Mar 20, 2015)

No TopGear isn't a consumer show, if it ever was, now it is an entertainments show featuring cars. They spend a lot of time each episode on silly / amusing adventures, how it can be categorised as a factual show as I read somewhere recently I don't know. Oh and Clarkson interviews celebrities, F1 drivers like Lewis Hamilton etc who also race the same car on the same track which is interesting, and the star in the reasonably priced car, people like Usain Bolt, to name but one. I have seen some on this thread describe it as a lads mag, I suppose this is in part true but it is probably less sexist than a proper lads mag.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 20, 2015)

Dandred said:


> Working class show.
> 
> Who can afford the cars? Is it just for window shopping?



You think the millions of people who watch the show will ever be able to afford any of the cars beyond the ones in James May's joke sections?


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 20, 2015)

andrewc said:


> A Saracen APC , it was eventually returned, but in very poor condition,  hatches left open so the rain could get in, that sort of stuff.  (according to a mate who was one of the eleven).



Can you send me a pm? (you've restricted your account)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 20, 2015)

Nice bit of lurking by andrewc 

And thanks for the info. Filth did a similar thing to my van, only I never got to see the damage, they said it was too fucked to return to me, in spite of it passing an MOT two weeks before they stole it. 

Of course Defective Boy said I should sue the police, yeah, if I had as much spare time as the McLibel duo, maybe...


----------



## pesh (Mar 20, 2015)

andrewc said:


> A Saracen APC , it was eventually returned, but in very poor condition,  hatches left open so the rain could get in, that sort of stuff.  (according to a mate who was one of the eleven).


To be fair they paid about £5k for it and got £100k compensation... Last laugh an that


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

EastEnder said:


> Erm, yes we get it, he's rich...



Also a public school boy... 

And a racist, no wonder he is so popular.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> You think the millions of people who watch the show will ever be able to afford any of the cars beyond the ones in James May's joke sections?



The millions of people seem to love a racist public school boy. What does that say?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> The millions of people seem to love a racist public school boy. What does that say?



That there's too many racist public school boys on tv?


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> That there's too many racist public school boys on tv?



And the people who support them by watching and signing online petitions?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 21, 2015)

/


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> And the people who support them by watching and signing online petitions?



We don't live somewhere free from racism and people finding humour with it.


----------



## Up the junction (Mar 21, 2015)

Re vacancy: unemployed, appropriate skill set, contentious parentage; Prince Harry's for the asking?


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> We don't live somewhere free from racism and people finding humour with it.



Obviously not. Let the audience decide, you know the audience that loves a racist public school boy......after all it is a show for the working class.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> Obviously not. Let the audience decide, you know the audience that loves a racist public school boy......after all it is a show for the working class.



Like most TV it's aimed partly at the working class (audience share) in the image of the Middle class (who are mainly the ones working in television).


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

So, the image of the "top gear lads" is aspirational?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

It's like who do you think The Sun is aimed at (something else Clarkson related) compared with who it is written by.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

After doing a paper on CDA and how newspapers write their stories this not something I'm not used to. However, my original point on this thread was that the BBC and Clarkson are middle class, and I commented on how surprised I was that the two combined issues managed to reach 18 pages.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> So, the image of the "top gear lads" is aspirational?



I've no idea, I don't watch it. I was talking more generally.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I've no idea, I don't watch it. I was talking more generally.



I don't watch it either, I don't have a TV, only download what I think is going to be okay.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

For such a daily mail type story, and it has been covered all over the shop, I was surprised how many pages have been given here.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> I don't watch it either, I don't have a TV, only download what I think is going to be okay.



That describes me sun to thu, I watch some at weekends although it's mainly kids stuff on.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> For such a daily mail type story, and it has been covered all over the shop, I was surprised how many pages have been given here.



Because people want to bash Clarkson.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

I though he was a man of the people, just look a few pages/post back.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> I though he was a man of the people, just look a few pages/post back.



So we're not a monothought clique after all then?


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So we're not a monothought clique after all then?



We are who?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> We are who?


the onset of mental decline can strike suddenly ^^


----------



## Dandred (Mar 21, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the onset of mental decline can strike suddenly ^^



from the quality for your posts recently that would seem to be the issue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> from the quality for your posts recently that would seem to be the issue.


you're blaming your mental decline on my posting harry belafonte's banana boat song?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> After doing a paper on CDA and how newspapers write their stories this not something I'm not used to. However, my original point on this thread was that the BBC and Clarkson are middle class, and I commented on how surprised I was that the two combined issues managed to reach 18 pages.


No you didn't. You commented on how unsurprised you were. And yet here you still are, posting away. Maybe there are just lots of people on here like you.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Dandred said:


> We are who?



I'm struggling to follow what your argument, if any, actually is now.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

Actually, despite that he has said a couple of stupid things, I don't think Clarkson is a racist.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Actually, despite that he has said a couple of stupid things, I don't think Clarkson is a racist.



Someone who makes racist remarks isn't a racist?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Someone who makes racist remarks isn't a racist?


Someone who fawns over Lewis Hamilton and Usain Bolt, probably not no.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Actually, despite that he has said a couple of stupid things, I don't think Clarkson is a racist.


He has done racist things. 

What more do you want?


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Someone who fawns over Lewis Hamilton and Usain Bolt, probably not no.



Some of his best mates are black?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Someone who fawns over Lewis Hamilton and Usain Bolt, probably not no.


That's a bit of a binary situation you're positing there. Either someone is a drooling white supremacist or not racist, nothing in between.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He has done racist things



Your choice of the word 'done' is interesting - which particular thing are you talking about?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

There's a slope on that bridge.


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 21, 2015)

Lazy Irish cunt


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 21, 2015)

Eeny Meany Miney Mo.........


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

eeny meeny...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> Your choice of the word 'done' is interesting - which particular thing are you talking about?


Speaking is doing.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Writing for The Sun.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Speaking is doing.



Good to get a sense of where you're aiming, honesty-wise.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> There's a slope on that bridge.



Yep, I pretty much made my mind up about him on the racial slurs front at that point.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Someone who fawns over Lewis Hamilton and Usain Bolt, probably not no.



The UKIP candidate in my constituency is an Asian guy*. I guess that means UKIP don't have any dodgy views on race.

*Interesting story. Dude used to be a Labour councillor. Got deselected. Left, became an independent. Tried to join Labour again. Failed. Now it seems in his desperation for office he's shacked up with UKIP. How you make that jump, rather than at least using the Tories as a stepping stone down, idk.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> Good to get a sense of where you're aiming, honesty-wise.


Where I'm aiming? I call saying racist things doing racist things. Saying is doing. 

I defy you to speak without moving bits of your body.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

There's a misunderstanding of casual racism here. They're not racist towards people they _know_. That's why they look surprised when their "I have black friends" gets laughed at. Having black friends isn't a get out of racism free card.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Where I'm aiming? I call saying racist things doing racist things. Saying is doing.
> 
> I defy you to speak without moving bits of your body.



There we are then.  It's good to have things out in the open.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 21, 2015)

8ball said:


> There we are then.  It's good to have things out in the open.


wtf are you getting at here? 

_I don't do racist things.

But you told a racist joke just then.

Ah, but that isn't doing things. It's just saying things._

Doesn't work, does it.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> wtf are you getting at here?
> 
> _I don't do racist things.
> 
> ...



I'm just hoping you're never in any kind of position of power if you're taking this line.

Not that it's particularly dishonest given the territory, but I'd hoped for better.

EDIT: that probably came over as a bit mean so I'll clarify further.  I don't mean to say that racist words are trivial, and we could debate the nature of the distinction between words and deeds at length, but when you make the choice between saying something that is totally clear (he has used racial slurs) and choosing something open to layers of misinterpretation (he has done racist things), and then go on to choose the latter, it can look a little like you are trying to (*cough*) sneak something past the censors.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Where I'm aiming? I call saying racist things doing racist things. Saying is doing.
> 
> I defy you to speak without moving bits of your body.



And (allegedly) chinning the producer _whilst_ calling him an Irish cunt. That turns an assault into a racial assault, doesn't it?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

In the years of shows they have done and the loads of footage they have filmed, and the fact that Clarkson's style is a little "oafish controversy", which in part is what makes him popular, it would be impossible for there not to have been a few outtakes / mistakes.

That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it. That the comment made it through to the actual program tells you not only about Clarkson but also that the team, the producers and the editors thought it was ok. So if he is damned, so should they be.

Such is the Marmite nature of TopGear that one of the moments that apparently caused offence which are often gone on about, I forget exactly which it was, did you know how many complaints were received, just one!


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And (allegedly) chinning the producer _whilst_ calling him an Irish cunt. That turns an assault into a racial assault, doesn't it?


While if he did punch the producer he probably should be sacked and probably will be, I don't think calling an Irish person Irish is racist!


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> While if he did punch the producer he probably should be sacked and probably will be, I don't think calling an Irish person Irish is racist!



So calling someone a Pakistani cunt isn't racist?

Why is their race/nationality relevent to their allegedly being a cunt?


----------



## seventh bullet (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it. That the comment made it through to the actual program tells you not only about Clarkson but also that the team, the producers and the editors thought it was ok. So if he is damned, so should they be.



I don't know about you, but I often find it difficult to resist the temptation to be a racist cunt.


----------



## Santino (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> In the years of shows they have done and the loads of footage they have filmed, and the fact that Clarkson's style is a little "oafish controversy", which in part is what makes him popular, it would be impossible for there not to have been a few outtakes / mistakes.
> 
> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it. That the comment made it through to the actual program tells you not only about Clarkson but also that the team, the producers and the editors thought it was ok. So if he is damned, so should they be.
> 
> Such is the Marmite nature of TopGear that one of the moments that apparently caused offence which are often gone on about, I forget exactly which it was, did you know how many complaints were received, just one!


Christ Almighty


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> In the years of shows they have done and the loads of footage they have filmed, and the fact that Clarkson's style is a little "oafish controversy", which in part is what makes him popular, it would be impossible for there not to have been a few outtakes / mistakes.
> 
> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it. That the comment made it through to the actual program tells you not only about Clarkson but also that the team, the producers and the editors thought it was ok. So if he is damned, so should they be!



I get the impression he liked trying to sneak things past the 'censors' - given the plausible deniability surrounding the use of the term it wouldn't surprise me if one or more persons picked up on it and kept schtum so the public could get an idea of what he was coming out with.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Clever racism.


----------



## JimW (Mar 21, 2015)

Enoch Powell's "less than ideal" rivers of blood speech. Get a grip, weltweit


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

JimW well at the time, I didn't know "slope" was an insult. I only once heard the word, in Tarrantino's film, and didn't make that connection from that.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

But now you do know.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Clever racism.



I think it was a game for him.  When trying to let people who use racial slurs off the hook people often talk about intention, which kind of implies something has to be said with a degree of hatred, or at least agreement with the historical general usage of the term. 
 In Clarkson's case, like in a lot of cases, I don't think he bore the hatred behind the term, but I think he was indifferent to how what he said might be received.  I think he also wrongly thought he could use the 'PC gone mad' card as a get out, but the media frenzies got away from him.

Being indifferent to the effect of his words, regardless of whether they bore the heft of any real hatred, is enough to make him a racist in my book - he knew there were people who would be hurt by that but felt his little game with the forces of 'PC censorship' was more important.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

I don't think he is indifferent. I think he knows where his appeal lies and panders to his audience.


----------



## JimW (Mar 21, 2015)

weltweit said:


> JimW well at the time, I didn't know "slope" was an insult. I only once heard the word, in Tarrantino's film, and didn't make that connection from that.


But then you've said it was too tempting because there was a local on the bridge, ie sounded like you reckon the racist joke chance was too good to miss. But surely you don't think that.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 21, 2015)

JimW said:


> But then you've said it was too tempting because there was a local on the bridge, ie sounded like you reckon the racist joke chance was too good to miss. But surely you don't think that.


It is late, I am not sure what I thinked .. perhaps the production team asked the guy to walk over the bridge precisely so Clarkson could make that comment. Though Hammond didn't seem to be in on it ...


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 21, 2015)

Of course he was in on it. He helped try and conceal it is all.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 21, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> I don't think he is indifferent. I think he knows where his appeal lies and panders to his audience.



I meant he was indifferent to any hurtful effect.  i think in the 'slope' case it missed almost everyone.  

Regardless, where there have been these racist controversies I reckon they haven't done the show any good at all in the eyes of its audience - they overwhelmingly just want a silly magazine show with some daft stunts and some middle-aged larking about.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it.



Yes, I'm sure it would be tempting, to a racist.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

Frankie Boyle is one of them who is so in love with a cheap laugh he will go for the vilest thing thats just popped into his head and yet even he has racism filters.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 22, 2015)

Maybe this would be useful:


----------



## Dandred (Mar 22, 2015)

As I don't have a TV, from the last few pages I've learned that:

1. Top Gear is hugely popular with 'the people'.  (comrades)

2. Clarkson isn't a racist, he just says racist things. 

3. He is a man of the people. 

4. He writes for the sun! 

5. My wife is a 'slope' in his eyes. 

6. Urban's clique has their heads up each others' arses.


----------



## xenon (Mar 22, 2015)

Dandred said:


> As I don't have a TV, from the last few pages I've learned that:
> 
> 1. Top Gear is hugely popular with 'the people'.  (comrades)
> 
> ...


You're a fucking nob. Insinuations and snide asides, with barely a cogent point. Clarkson's a cunt BTW, no disagreement on that. I just think you're a wanker.


----------



## Dandred (Mar 22, 2015)

petty insults rather than addressing the issues.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Mar 22, 2015)

The Boy said:


> Aren't Slater & Gordon a mob of ambulance chasers of the sort who advertise during Countdown and on the higher numbered cable channels?  Doubt anything significant will come of it beyond a cheque of some sort.


They are, ever since they were taken over by an Australian law firm, but there is another branch of them which consists of employment lawyers, and that's the bit which will be doing this. They're mostly a brilliant bunch of lawyers (IMHO).


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I don't think calling an Irish person Irish is racist!


The accusation is not that he alleged the person was Irish, but that he used it as part of an insult. "You cunt" is not racist "you Irish cunt" is.  It's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. It was a racial slur. The allegation I believe is that Clarkson added the word "lazy" - "you lazy Irish cunt". This chucks in a stereotype, and reinforces the racist intent. 

If, however, it is your contention that Irishness doesn't constitute a race, then you're going to have to do a lot of defining. 
 There are no objective rules for deciding what constitutes a race, or for deciding to what race a person belongs. Race isn't a scientific fact, but a social and political construct. Very often, race is in the eye of the beholder. "You are other, you are different, you possess negative attributes due to that otherness I prejudge as being x, y and z".

Lazy Irish cunt.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> If, however, it is your contention that Irishness doesn't constitute a race, then you're going to have to do a lot of defining.
> There are no objective rules for deciding what constitutes a race, or for deciding to what race a person belongs. Race isn't a scientific fact, but a social and political construct. Very often, race is in the eye of the beholder. "You are other, you are different, you possess negative attributes due to that otherness I prejudge as being x, y and z".



While I'd say the case you quote qualifies for several reasons, I think you need a little more than basic "othering" to define something as racism.


----------



## Looby (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it.



Wow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> In the years of shows they have done and the loads of footage they have filmed, and the fact that Clarkson's style is a little "oafish controversy", which in part is what makes him popular, it would be impossible for there not to have been a few outtakes / mistakes.
> 
> That Clarkson made the "slope" comment was less than ideal but I can see it was tempting because the bridge was at an angle and also there was an Asian person on it. That the comment made it through to the actual program tells you not only about Clarkson but also that the team, the producers and the editors thought it was ok. So if he is damned, so should they be.
> 
> Such is the Marmite nature of TopGear that one of the moments that apparently caused offence which are often gone on about, I forget exactly which it was, did you know how many complaints were received, just one!


less rhan ideal? what would have been ideal?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> While I'd say the case you quote qualifies for several reasons, I think you need a little more than basic "othering" to define something as racism.


I wasn't. I was saying that _race_ isn't a scientific fact, but a social and political construct. That if someone is going to suggest Irishness isn't a race, then they need to define what they think a race is.

It's an argument you often see: "that can't be racism, as x, y or z aren't a race".  Why?  what does qualify, what doesn't?

And here we hit upon one of the other difficulties when discussing race: the differences between what is meant by race, by culture, by ethnicity, by nationality, by a population are not at all clear; there is no general agreement on where these terms are bounded or overlap.

The dividing of humanity into _races_ can in itself be seen as _racist_, because the categorisation is based on subjective, mistaken and discriminatory pseudo-science.  So someone who say "you Irish are all lazy" is attributing laziness to either congenital, genetic or inherent traits found in the Irish, or to (and here you can use Edward Said if you wish) to culture, to "not us".  But I'm not going to arse around with Jeremy Clarkson as he aims his punch asking him, "excuse me, are you abusing my Irishness on faux genetic or faux cultural grounds?" 

So, really, you're going to have to define what _you_ think constitutes _racism_ if you're saying my inclusions don't qualify.

For me, racism is the words, opinions and/or actions of one who discriminates on grounds of race.  That race itself can be a construct of the racist doesn't weaken the definition but enhances it.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> <snip cos, well, look at it ffs>



I was talking about your last sentence.
Where  race is purely in the eye of the beholder racism becomes whatever you want it to be.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> I was talking about your last sentence.
> Where  race is purely in the eye of the beholder racism becomes whatever you want it to be.


I didn't say or imply purely.  I used words like often. Race can also be in the self identity of the owner. 

It remains, however a fluid and imprecise term riddled with inherent confusion. 

(I'm doing something else but I'll get back to you on Clarkson's taboo challenging which is separate from this incident and which I think you're partially right about).


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I didn't say or imply purely.  I used words like often.



This one needs a smiley not in the current arsenal.

In any case, you've mentioned genetics, culture, ethnicity, but in the case of Clarkson specifically (and in a lot of 'x is not a race' formulations) it is a matter of history, power relationships and linguistic habits.

It makes it easier not to get in a mess when Islamiphobes* say they aren't racist because there are white converts, or that anti-semitism is not racist.

* - the iPad corrected it to this spelling ffs!


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> This one needs a smiley not in the current arsenal.
> 
> In any case, you've mentioned genetics, culture, ethnicity, but in the case of Clarkson specifically (and in a lot of 'x is not a race' formulations) it is a matter of history, power relationships and linguistic habits.
> 
> ...



"in the case of Clarkson specifically (and in a lot of 'x is not a race' formulations) it is a matter of history, power relationships and linguistic habits."

I'm not sure what that means.  Is the "it" referring to your definition of racism? (This is probably me being slow).

Leaving aside the assault incident, I was going to go into what you were saying about taboo challenging, which I think we're not that far away on.  But by chance (well, not chance really, given the currency of the "story"), Kenan Malik's latest tweet is a link to this, which puts it better than I could:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/o...-clarkson-top-gear-hits-rock-bottom.html?_r=1


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> "in the case of Clarkson specifically (and in a lot of 'x is not a race' formulations) it is a matter of history, power relationships and linguistic habits."
> 
> I'm not sure what that means.  Is the "it" referring to your definition of racism? (This is probably me being slow).



Taking the example of "Lazy Irish cunt" - my point is very basically that you need to identify a wound if you are going to rub salt into it. 

Good article that you link to, by the way.  As well as being the schoolboy that has never grown up, there is a big element of "how *dare* they try and control me when I am making them so much money", which he has spotlighted himself in his little statements over the last week or so.  He should learn to stop digging if he wants to work in TV again.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> Taking the example of "Lazy Irish cunt" - my point is very basically that you need to identify a wound if you are going to rub salt into it.


I'm not getting your meaning.

I'm assume "you" is "one", but I don't don't who is doing the identifying, the rubbing, or why.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

But let's assume for a moment I wanted to introduce someone to the idea of race and racism, what I'd do is start them with the entry on race in Raymond Williams' book, _Keywords_, then get them onto Kenan Malik's _Strange Fruit: Why Both Sides Are Wrong in the Race Debate_.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> But let's assume for a moment I wanted to introduce someone to the idea of race and racism, what I'd do is start them with the entry on race in Raymond Williams' book, _Keywords_, then get them onto Kenan Malik's _Strange Fruit: Why Both Sides Are Wrong in the Race Debate_.



I hope this putative visitor from another (presumably utterly monocultural) planet would be suitably grateful for your efforts. 

Aside: a quick bounce in the direction of Malik's blog led me to the below cartoon, which I thought tangentially appropriate.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> I hope this putative visitor from another (presumably utterly monocultural) planet would be suitably grateful for your efforts.


Sarcy fucker. 

I supplied the information as a gesture of goodwill in the absence of any forthcoming explanation of the salt/wound analogy, which I am still struggling to see the meaning of. 

Well, I struggled for a bit then gave up, to give full disclosure.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Sarcy fucker.
> 
> I supplied the information as a gesture of goodwill in the absence of any forthcoming explanation of the salt/wound analogy, which I am still struggling to see the meaning of.
> 
> Well, I struggled for a bit then gave up, to give full disclosure.



Imagine the junior producer was, say, Bavarian, and the entitled English twat calls the junior colleague a "lazy Teutonic cunt" - you can see how that would be heading towards surrealness.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

Dandred said:


> As I don't have a TV, from the last few pages I've learned that:
> 
> 1. Top Gear is hugely popular with 'the people'.  (comrades)
> 
> ...


What makes you come to the conclusion in your 6th post? This has been a pretty good thread compared to other online discussions. Only one person has 'defended' Clarkson here and he is a renowned witless twit


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What makes you come to the conclusion in your 6th post? This has been a pretty good thread compared to other online discussions. Only one person has 'defended' Clarkson here and he is a renowned witless twit



But that one makes more sense than most of the other conclusions.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

'I don't have a TV' people always have to mention it. So fucking what, in the age of smartphones and laptops, you've got TV.  hyacynth bucket nobber


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 'I don't have a TV' people always have to mention it. So fucking what, in the age of smartphones and laptops, you've got TV.  hyacynth bucket nobber



I am considerably more cultured than yow.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> But that one makes more sense than most of the other conclusions.


How so? It's not in evidence here. It just seems a snide comment a propos of nowt


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How so? It's not in evidence here. It just seems a snide comment a propos of nowt


It is dandred declaring on urban, as a part of urban, that he is better than urban because he doesn't care about Clarkson. And doing so again and again and again and again.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> I am considerably more cultured than yow.


presumably dandred spends his evenings listening to verdi while the hordes sit slack jawed in the glow of the idiot box


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 22, 2015)

Dandred said:


> As I don't have a TV, from the last few pages I've learned that:
> 
> 1. Top Gear is hugely popular with 'the people'.  (comrades)
> 
> ...



If you'd made it clear from the outside that you were just here to be a dick, I wouldn't have wasted my time engaging to find out wtf your point is supposed to be.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> presumably dandred spends his evenings listening to verdi while the hordes sit slack jawed in the glow of the idiot box



I think Verdi is considered a bit gauche, darling - the opera equivalent of Burt Bacharach.




I don't know anything about opera.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> How so? It's not in evidence here. It just seems a snide comment a propos of nowt



Yeah, you're right - not in evidence on this thread that I can see tbf.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> Imagine the junior producer was, say, Bavarian, and the entitled English twat calls the junior colleague a "lazy Teutonic cunt" - you can see how that would be heading towards surrealness.


The whole arena is often surreal.

But laziness is not usually one of the stereotypes that is attributed to Teutonicness.  But the question is how those supposed traits come to be attributed.

To take things back a step or two, I don’t see race as forming part of my identity.  It has no meaning.  I can factually state where I was brought up, what my ancestry is, and where my ancestors lived, though.

I live in Scotland, I belong to the section of the Scottish population that originated in Ireland and migrated to Scotland in the 19th century.  I don’t think there is anything about my biological ancestry or the area I trace my mDNA pool back to that has any effect whatsoever on my lived culture, though.  But the imposed mainstream institutions of race (what we call the theory of multiculturalism, rather than the lived experience of multi cultures) demand a biological determinism for culture.  This is in itself racist and reactionary. This drive to respect the “authentic”, to ensure that cultural “authenticity” survives, to confuse biology and culture has entered the way we see identity, and it’s detrimental and dangerous.

This “authenticity”, because of its biological determinism, can only be an ersatz authenticity. I’ve mentioned before in similar discussion, the TV programme in which people were using mitochondrial DNA to trace their haplogroups. British people were tracing back their genetic ancestry. In one episode, some black Britons traced their genetic origins to specific areas of Africa. They had not known they had any connection with these specific areas before, nor of the culture of the area. But they came away saying that they had found out something about their own cultural identity. This is the sort of thing I mean when I say that there is a tendency to view cultural identity as a biological phenomenon.

These people were in fact mistaken in thinking they’d discovered anything about their cultural identity. Cultural identity is passed socially, not by mDNA. This is the biologicalisation of the politics of difference. This is what makes distinguishing racism from antiracism increasingly difficult.

It has also been part of what has propelled the most conservative sections of minority populations back to prominence, allowing them to reassert their reactionary impulses at the expense of more vulnerable groups.  Those conservative sections are where the notionally “liberal” establishment finds the “community leaders” that the mainstream establishment seeks out in order to do business with.

The ridiculous antirationalism of postmodern cultural relativism has served to baffle people and make them distrust any questioning of cultural mores. Thus women with a reactionary minority culture can be condemned to accepting standards that would not be thought acceptable more generally, merely because “it’s their culture”, when police guidelines advise that officers proceed sensitivity to “cultural differences”, differences often defined by those community leaders elevated from “authentic” conservative sections of the minority population. In Australia, for example, courts often accept that Aborigines should be treated according to their own customs rather than Australian law (which is presumably seen as colonialist), resulting in people convicted of rape being treated differently according to their defined race. (C/f the case of Pascoe Jamilmira in 2002).

Now, that’s what I call surreal.  It’s Kafka-esque in its cowardly, liberal, relativist stupidity.  And in using “race” to determine what type of justice people receive, it is itself racist. If you are going to use “race” to define culture, then you’re in dodgy territory.

That’s what I was alluding to, that’s what I was teasing out.  But, frankly, this post has been far more thinking than the Clarkson “lazy Irish” assault incident deserved.

I don’t want to be in the business of policing thought crime.  It frankly doesn’t make much difference whether Clarkson was thinking about the guy’s race when he thumped him.  The offence here is that an over-privileged bully thinks he has the right to do violence to his staff if he comes home from the pub and the correct dinner is not on the table for him.  But if he exclaimed (as is alleged) in the course of the assault “you lazy Irish cunt”, then that statement, as a matter of fact, was racist.  Not because laziness is an actual attribute of Irishness, nor because the Irish race is a scientific fact (it isn’t), but because Clarkson used it as an insult intending to show the aptness of the stereotype he was employing.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What makes you come to the conclusion in your 6th post? This has been a pretty good thread compared to other online discussions. Only one person has 'defended' Clarkson here and he is a renowned witless twit


I assume you are referring to me, charming, and you OU by comparison I suppose are Mr Perfect, I don't think so.

I may be the only poster on this thread that actually watches Top Gear, I sometimes watch on Sunday evenings and often old episodes on Dave while waiting and with my son. Perhaps you are all devotees of Clarkson's newspaper columns? I find the TV program entertaining and fun and I am rarely offended watching it, for the vast majority of the time (perhaps 99%) it is harmless and amusing.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Anyhow, it might be interesting to know what actually happened in this fracas, thought I doubt we will find out. Suffice to say if Clarkson did rant at and then hit the producer, especially being on a final warning, the BBC should sack him and I expect if that was the case they will. ETA and if Clarkson did hit the producer perhaps the police should be informed and the producer's lawyers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I assume you are referring to me, charming, and you OU by comparison I suppose are Mr Perfect, I don't think so.
> 
> I may be the only poster on this thread that actually watches Top Gear, I sometimes watch on Sunday evenings and often old episodes on Dave while waiting and with my son. Perhaps you are all devotees of Clarkson's newspaper columns? I find the TV program entertaining and fun and I am rarely offended watching it, for the vast majority of the time (perhaps 99%) it is harmless and amusing.


It's not harmless. You never learn anything.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> It's not harmless. You never learn anything.


Have you been harmed by watching Top Gear? have I?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Have you been harmed by watching Top Gear? have I?


Not directly. Have you read any of this thread?


----------



## Lemon Eddy (Mar 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> 'I don't have a TV' people always have to mention it.



I honestly have an acquaintance who is a vegan crossfitter who does not have a TV.  She is incredibly wary about mentioning any of these factors in conversation, because of the much touted meme.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Not directly. Have you read any of this thread?


Yes, I think I have read all of it as it happens.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Yes, I think I have read all of it as it happens.


Then why should I spend my time explaining it again to a dimwit?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

Lemon Eddy said:


> I honestly have an acquaintance who is a vegan crossfitter who does not have a TV.  She is incredibly wary about mentioning any of these factors in conversation, because of the much touted meme.


What's a crossfitter?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

Lemon Eddy said:


> a vegan crossfitter who does not have a TV.


I have to ask: what is a crossfitter?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Then why should I spend my time explaining it again to a dimwit?


Your quick resort to insults says more about you OU than it does about me.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> While if he did punch the producer he probably should be sacked and probably will be, I don't think calling an Irish person Irish is racist!



He called him an "Irish cunt", therefore he didn't intend "Irish" to be a reference to nationality _per se_, but rather a derogatory prefix to "cunt". If "Irish" wasn't intended to be derogatory, there'd have been no point to saying/mentioning it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 22, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So calling someone a Pakistani cunt isn't racist?
> 
> Why is their race/nationality relevent to their allegedly being a cunt?



It isn't.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

urban dictionary said:
			
		

> A person who likes to be average at everything, and good at nothing. A person who exercises often, so that they can get better at exercise. Someone who puts in many hours of effort, without understanding the difference between training and exercise.
> 
> Important facets of a crossfitter are: self-righteousness (they think they invented barbell training, HIIT and circuit training), conformity (oh, we have to get the £90 reebok trainers and wear pull-up socks? Mkay) and delusion (oh, your warmup is my workout? Really? Do you even lift?).
> 
> ...


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

Cheers Dotcom. It's times like this that I realise so much of contemporary culture has passed me by.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Your quick resort to insults says more about you OU than it does about me.


I think it's a fair description rather than an insult. 23 pages and you still don't get it.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's a fair description rather than an insult. 23 pages and you still don't get it.


And there you go, one person's "fair description" is another's "personal insult".

I would never watch a show you presented!


----------



## cesare (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Your quick resort to insults says more about you OU than it does about me.


Was that an example of a not-so-harmless insult, then?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> Imagine the junior producer was, say, Bavarian, and the entitled English twat calls the junior colleague a "lazy Teutonic cunt" - you can see how that would be heading towards surrealness.



Not the same thing, calling someone a catch-all like "Teutonic" which pretty much gets used to mean "of Germanic heritage", as using their *nationality as *a perjorative. "Lazy German cunt" would be closer to what Clarkson said.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> And there you go, one person's "fair description" is another's "personal insult".
> 
> I would never watch a show you presented!



Is Paki just an abbreviation as well?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> And there you go, one person's "fair description" is another's "personal insult".
> 
> I would never watch a show you presented!


Imagine it coming from Jeremy Clarkson on national tv


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What's a crossfitter?



Sounds like the person who erects crucifixes before executions!


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> Was that an example of a not-so-harmless insult, then?


It was polite comment on OU's quick resort to personal insults.
Interesting to me that on a thread discussing largely how offensive Clarkson is or can be, OU is also happy to throw insults.


----------



## cesare (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It was polite comment on OU's quick resort to personal insults.
> Interesting to me that on a thread discussing largely how offensive Clarkson is or can be, OU is also happy to throw insults.


I find it interesting that you describe Clarkson's racist insult as harmless but get peeved by OU's insult to you.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It was polite comment on OU's quick resort to personal insults.
> Interesting to me that on a thread discussing largely how offensive Clarkson is or can be, OU is also happy to throw insults.


I am not broadcasting my insults to millions around the world, thus normalising bigotry and making children think it's OK to dismiss Mexicans as lazy, use the word chav to describe something cheap, call Burmese people slopes and use the word nigger in a funny rhyme. All I did was suggest that you were a clot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I am not broadcasting my insults to millions around the world, thus normalising bigotry and making children think it's OK to dismiss Mexicans as lazy, use the word chav to describe something cheap, call Burmese people slopes and use the word nigger in a funny rhyme. All I did was suggest that you were a clot.


tbf, ww, ou's being relatively polite about this.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 22, 2015)

If you want me to call you a cunt on telly so you feel really offended weltweit , I'll try and pull some strings to make it happen.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

cesare said:


> I find it interesting that you describe Clarkson's racist insult as harmless but get peeved by OU's insult to you.


If you can quote me describing "Clarkson's racist insult as harmless" I would be interested. Clarkson has said some stupid things but in the nature of a national show he has been taken to task for it, rightly. And I am sure if what has been reported is true, he will be punished for his so called fracas as well. None of that permits OU to sling insults or makes OU any superior to the subject of the thread. An insult is an insult.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Favelado said:


> If you want me to call you a cunt on telly so you feel really offended weltweit , I'll try and pull some strings to make it happen.


I don't watch much telly, I would probably miss it


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I assume you are referring to me, charming, and you OU by comparison I suppose are Mr Perfect, I don't think so.
> 
> I may be the only poster on this thread that actually watches Top Gear, I sometimes watch on Sunday evenings and often old episodes on Dave while waiting and with my son. Perhaps you are all devotees of Clarkson's newspaper columns? I find the TV program entertaining and fun and I am rarely offended watching it, for the vast majority of the time (perhaps 99%) it is harmless and amusing.


is this harmless and amusing?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

It might be nice to see the uncut program but no I don't think it is very offensive no ..


----------



## cesare (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> If you can quote me describing "Clarkson's racist insult as harmless" I would be interested. Clarkson has said some stupid things but in the nature of a national show he has been taken to task for it, rightly. And I am sure if what has been reported is true, he will be punished for his so called fracas as well. None of that permits OU to sling insults or makes OU any superior to the subject of the thread. An insult is an insult.


#656 unless you think that the "slope" incident (for example) is the 1%? What's "so called" about the fracas btw? The description or the fact of it?

OU can insult you if he wants, he doesn't need permission. Your reaction is  considering your support of Clarkson.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It might be nice to see the uncut program but no I don't think it is very offensive no ..


you don't think there's anything offensive, nor downright nasty about what they are saying?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

Just imagine waking up and remembering you're weltweit


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Did you find the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers offensive? did you know that Catalan TV took Fawlty Towers and dubbed it into Catalan. But did you know that they made Manuel a Mexican. This was explained to me by a Mexican who still watched the program and thought it said more about Catalonia than anything else.

And before anyone asks, no I didn't find Manuel being from Barcelona offensive.
He had to be from somewhere so why not there?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Did you find the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers offensive? did you know that Catalan TV took Fawlty Towers and dubbed it into Catalan. But did you know that they made Manuel a Mexican. This was explained to me by a Mexican who still watched the program and thought it said more about Catalonia than anything else.
> 
> And before anyone asks, no I didn't find Manuel being from Barcelona offensive.
> He had to be from somewhere so why not there?


what has that to do with anything?


----------



## xenon (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It might be nice to see the uncut program but no I don't think it is very offensive no ..



You don't think broadcasting racial stereotypes by way of humour is offensive? Hint: you don't have to feel personly offended to concede the point. It's not about your viewing tollerances.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Did you find the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers offensive? did you know that Catalan TV took Fawlty Towers and dubbed it into Catalan. But did you know that they made Manuel a Mexican. This was explained to me by a Mexican who still watched the program and thought it said more about Catalonia than anything else.
> 
> And before anyone asks, no I didn't find Manuel being from Barcelona offensive.
> He had to be from somewhere so why not there?



In the rest of Spain in Castillian transmissions he was Italian and called Paolo. Best of all in the Basque Country they kept him as Spanish.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

xenon said:


> You don't think broadcasting racial stereotypes by way of humour is offensive? Hint: you don't have to feel personly offended to concede the point. It's not about your viewing tollerances.


But I don't think Mexico has a commonly perceived stereotype like that which was why I thought it was just silly. Of course Mexicans have the right to be offended just as those from Barcelona had the right to be offended by the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers.

I was just Googling to try to find a list of the counties that show Top Gear, wondering for example if Mexico was among them, couldn't yet find a list unfortunately.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But I don't think Mexico has a commonly perceived stereotype like that which was why I thought it was just silly. Of course Mexicans have the right to be offended just as those from Barcelona had the right to be offended by the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers.
> 
> I was just Googling to try to find a list of the counties that show Top Gear, wondering for example if Mexico was among them, couldn't yet find a list unfortunately.



Mexicans went fucking apeshit about that episode of Top Gear.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> you don't think there's anything offensive, nor downright nasty about what they are saying?


It isn't the best bit of TV they have produced no..


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It isn't the best bit of TV they have produced no..


so, you've changed your mind?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Mexicans went fucking apeshit about that episode of Top Gear.


I do remember complaints ...


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> so, you've changed your mind?


How so?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Did you find the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers offensive? did you know that Catalan TV took Fawlty Towers and dubbed it into Catalan. But did you know that they made Manuel a Mexican. This was explained to me by a Mexican who still watched the program and thought it said more about Catalonia than anything else.
> 
> And before anyone asks, no I didn't find Manuel being from Barcelona offensive.
> He had to be from somewhere so why not there?


It wouldn't happen now, and there are moments in FT that jar, yes. 

But you miss the point that the joke was mostly on Fawlty for his attitude towards Manuel - the irony being that he was even more incompetent than the man he was mocking. There is no such layer of irony to TG. 

So yes, far worse than something from the 1970s that itself now looks dated and awkward.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But I don't think Mexico has a commonly perceived stereotype like that which was why I thought it was just silly. Of course Mexicans have the right to be offended just as those from Barcelona had the right to be offended by the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers.


You don't think non-Mexicans can be offended by racist comments?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> How so?


that was a question


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wouldn't happen now, and there are moments in FT that jar, yes.
> 
> But you miss the point that the joke was mostly on Fawlty for his attitude towards Manuel - the irony being that he was even more incompetent than the man he was mocking. There is no such layer of irony to TG.
> 
> So yes, far worse than something from the 1970s that itself now looks dated and awkward.


It is true that there are aspects of FT that would not be commissioned today or shown. And there are aspects of TG which only get the program and presenters into trouble.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You don't think non-Mexicans can be offended by racist comments?


A lot of people are Clarkson haters because they see him as promoting the car which they see as evil, others think he is a racist violent thug which I disagree with (current fracas as yet unproven), yes people may be offended by racist comments but my point is that in the hundreds of TG programs out there these are actually quite few and far between.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> A lot of people are Clarkson haters because they see him as promoting the car which they see as evil, others think he is a racist violent thug which I disagree with (current fracas as yet unproven), yes people may be offended by racist comments but my point is that in the hundreds of TG programs out there these are actually quite few and far between.


that doesn't make it any less acceptable. 
have you changed your mind about the mexican insults?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

And I have said that if Clarkson did rant at, insult, and punch this producer then he should get what he deserves, the boot from the BBC, a police investigation and probably a legal case for damages.

But it does interest me that there was hardly a murmer when John Prescott punched a voter in the face, a voter during an election campaign! That seems strange to me.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> that doesn't make it any less acceptable.
> have you changed your mind about the mexican insults?


Not really no, I think they were being silly, that anyone took what they said seriously indicates a sense of humour bypass!


----------



## xenon (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But I don't think Mexico has a commonly perceived stereotype like that which was why I thought it was just silly. Of course Mexicans have the right to be offended just as those from Barcelona had the right to be offended by the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers.
> 
> I was just Googling to try to find a list of the counties that show Top Gear, wondering for example if Mexico was among them, couldn't yet find a list unfortunately.



Even if you aren't hither to aware of the lazy Mexican stereotype, surely you can infer from the fact he's using in a joke, that the stereotype exists. Otherwise his racist joke would make no sense. You are being a bit daft here.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Not really no, I think they were being silly, that anyone took what they said seriously indicates a sense of humour bypass!


so you think it's acceptable to make crass insults based on national stereotypes? on the list you go.


----------



## xenon (Mar 22, 2015)

I used to watch Top Gear BTW, back in the early 90's. I think Clarkson was on it then. I certainly don't hate cars. I also used to laugh at some of Jim Davidson's stuff when I was about 12, even though I had black classmates. What I'm saying is, I don't think it's necessary to be some kind of wet liberal po faced humourless prig to object to racists jokes. That your attitudes and understanding of pervasive stereotypes, the power they have, increases as you grow older. Or at least, as you pay a bit more attention and listen to people.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

so, weltweit, i shall have to keep calling you a dimwit, a clot, a dunderhead, a nitwit, an ignoramus and a dunce. cos it's just a bit of a laugh, just being silly for kicks.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But it does interest me that there was hardly a murmer when John Prescott punched a voter in the face, a voter during an election campaign! That seems strange to me.



Prescott was assaulted first though!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> And I have said that if Clarkson did rant at, insult, and punch this producer then he should get what he deserves, the boot from the BBC, a police investigation and probably a legal case for damages.
> 
> But it does interest me that there was hardly a murmer when John Prescott punched a voter in the face, a voter during an election campaign! That seems strange to me.


he'd just had eggs chucked at him. clarkson was just cross, like a little boy, that he wasn't getting fed cos he'd turned up too late as he'd been on the sauce.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But it does interest me that there was hardly a murmer when John Prescott punched a voter in the face, a voter during an election campaign! That seems strange to me.


The guy had a mullet.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

xenon said:


> I used to watch Top Gear BTW, back in the early 90's. I think Clarkson was on it then. I certainly don't hate cars. I also used to laugh at some of Jim Davidson's stuff when I was about 12, even though I had black classmates. What I'm saying is, I don't think it's necessary to be some kind of wet liberal po faced humourless prig to object to racists jokes. That your attitudes and understanding of pervasive stereotypes, the power they have, increases as you grow older. Or at least, as you pay a bit more attention and listen to people.


I think I understand what you are saying - my own tastes have changed over the years in that there were things I thought funny years ago that offend me now. That said my favourite types of humour or comedy are either self deprecating or perhaps observational but especially I like where there is no fall guy at all. Not that many comedians do this even now I prefer when comedians are not laughing at someone or something.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> so, weltweit, i shall have to keep calling you a dimwit, a clot, a dunderhead, a nitwit, an ignoramus and a dunce. cos it's just a bit of a laugh, just being silly for kicks.


If you say something, and the recipient tells you they find it insulting, to repeat it is an insult.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> If you say something, and the recipient tells you they find it insulting, to repeat it is an insult.


you dolt!


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Prescott was assaulted first though!


You mean someone chucked an egg hardly equivalent to a punch by a trained boxer .. and Prezzer wasn't in a position to be certain who threw it, he just turned and punched the person nearest to him ... And Blair just seemed well .. proud


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> If you say something, and the recipient tells you they find it insulting, to repeat it is an insult.


you're assuming that OU thinks it's never ok to insult people.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> You mean someone chucked an egg hardly equivalent to a punch by a trained boxer .. and Prezzer wasn't in a position to be certain who threw it, he just turned and punched the person nearest to him ... And Blair just seemed well .. proud


And this is relevant because...


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And this is relevant because...


Just because in two separate cases it appears someone was punched, well in Clarkson's case at the moment it is alleged, but the outcomes seem likely to be very different ..


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> You mean someone chucked an egg hardly equivalent to a punch by a trained boxer .. and Prezzer wasn't in a position to be certain who threw it, he just turned and punched the person nearest to him ... And Blair just seemed well .. proud



 Mullet boy was right in his face.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> you're assuming that OU thinks it's never ok to insult people.


No OU obviously thinks it is fine to insult people, as evidenced by this thread, which makes it all the more interesting that he objects so strongly to perceived insults by Clarkson et al .. not just the insult eh OU but the type of insult I am guessing ..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> No OU obviously thinks it is fine to insult people, as evidenced by this thread, which makes it all the more interesting that he objects so strongly to perceived insults by Clarkson et al .. not just the insult eh OU but the type of insult I am guessing ..


tbh given  the absolute drivel you've been posting on this thread, you've got off lightly.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> No OU obviously thinks it is fine to insult people, as evidenced by this thread, which makes it all the more interesting that he objects so strongly to perceived insults by Clarkson et al .. not just the insult eh OU but the type of insult I am guessing ..


you really are a halfwit, aren't you?


----------



## 5t3IIa (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> so, weltweit, i shall have to keep calling you a dimwit, a clot, a dunderhead, a nitwit, an ignoramus and a dunce. cos it's just a bit of a laugh, just being silly for kicks.


Calling him all that is just exhausting, I just stuck him on ignore. He's a nincompoop and a dipstick.


----------



## The Boy (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> Just imagine waking up and remembering you're weltweit


Harsh!

But fair


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

5t3IIa said:


> Calling him all that is just exhausting, I just stuck him on ignore. He's a nincompoop and a dipstick.


i quite enjoy it


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> A lot of people are Clarkson haters because they see him as promoting the car which they see as evil.


Really?  That sounds more like something a Top Gear fan would say than something that's actually true. 

For disclosure: I have no interest in the programme due to it not being my sort of entertainment. I find neither cars nor grown up schoolboys arsing around in them inherently interesting. That doesn't mean I am anti car. I have one and use it every day. 

However, I also have a sofa and use it every day. I would be equally unimpressed by a pitch which said "three blokey guys get up to hilarious scrapes with sofas". 

For me, in the unlikely event that I would be watching a film with a car chase, that'd be the section I'd use to go and make a cup of tea. 

If other people want to watch it, that's no business of mine. They should go right ahead.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> you really are a halfwit, aren't you?


Actually, I might have been floundering a bit earlier in the thread but now I think I have a point!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

The Boy said:


> Harsh!
> 
> But fair


that was paraphrasing Richard The Hamster Hammond (he's not even a real hamster) in his Mexican baiting. Nasty piece of work. They're all as bad as each other.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i quite enjoy it


 And you're a loon an' all


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Actually, I might have been floundering a bit earlier in the thread but now I think I have a point!


i don't think you have anything close to resembling a point, you booby


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i don't think you have anything close to resembling a point, you booby


You don't personally mind insulting people at all, yet you object when others may have done so.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> You don't personally mind insulting people at all, yet you object when others may have done so.


yes. i don't mind insulting individuals for failing to grasp simple concepts and excusing the propagation of bigotry, you donkey


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> yes. i don't mind insulting individuals for being idiots, you donkey


I will let you have the last comment as it seems important to you.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I will let you have the last comment as it seems important to you.


donkey? thanks, clown


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> <massive uber-snip>



Yeah, that's what I meant.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> Cheers Dotcom. It's times like this that I realise so much of contemporary culture has passed me by.



You're not missing much, though _Breaking Bad _is worth a go.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> You're not missing much, though _Breaking Bad _is worth a go.


So I'm told. I keep meaning to get round to it, but it seems a daunting prospect. 

I'm currently working through Star Trek ( TOS, of course; i don't count any spin off as being actual Star Trek).


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> So I'm told. I keep meaning to get round to it, but it seems a daunting prospect.
> 
> I'm currently working through Star Trek ( TOS, of course; i don't count any spin off as being actual Star Trek).


What about films involving the TOS crew


----------



## Favelado (Mar 22, 2015)

Terrahawks, Star Trek, Thunderbirds. None better than the other.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> What about films involving the TOS crew


All the films from Motion Picture to Undiscovered Country are allowable. 

The reboots are accepted on individual merit as amusing diversions. 

TNG is disallowed.


----------



## Cid (Mar 22, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But I don't think Mexico has a commonly perceived stereotype like that which was why I thought it was just silly. Of course Mexicans have the right to be offended just as those from Barcelona had the right to be offended by the portrayal of Manuel in Fawlty Towers.
> 
> I was just Googling to try to find a list of the counties that show Top Gear, wondering for example if Mexico was among them, couldn't yet find a list unfortunately.



Hammond loves the US; muscle cars, Hollywood etc. In the US anti-Mexican racism is prevalent, the sleepy Mexican is part of that. Hammond knew this, he is a racist cunt.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> All the films from Motion Picture to Undiscovered Country are allowable.
> 
> The reboots are accepted on individual merit as amusing diversions.
> 
> TNG is disallowed.


What about 'Generations' which involves the cast  of TOS and TNG


hah! solve that quandry sir!


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> What about 'Generations' which involves the cast  of TOS and TNG
> 
> 
> hah! solve that quandry sir!


It is disallowed, as it involves the cast of TNG.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> TNG is disallowed.



Star Trek V is allowed but not TNG?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

TNG has Whoopi Goldberg as guynan a well. Another point in its favour.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 22, 2015)

Cid said:


> Hammond loves the US; muscle cars, Hollywood etc. In the US anti-Mexican racism is prevalent, the sleepy Mexican is part of that. Hammond knew this, he is a racist cunt.


I do know many Americans are anti Mexicans, I was there once with my then Spanish wife and some people were very rude to her, it was only after some discussion we realised they thought she was Mexican.


----------



## iona (Mar 22, 2015)

I've spent way too much of my afternoon reading some awfully written and truely disturbing fan fics thanks to this thread..


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2015)

we've all been there. the doctor who stuff is truly bad


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2015)

8ball said:


> Star Trek V is allowed but not TNG?


Yup. 

It's exactly the same as my Dr Who heresy. I watched TOS as a kid, but TNG was after my time. I never watched it. I therefore can't feel nostalgia for it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I wasn't. I was saying that _race_ isn't a scientific fact, but a social and political construct. That if someone is going to suggest Irishness isn't a race, then they need to define what they think a race is.
> 
> It's an argument you often see: "that can't be racism, as x, y or z aren't a race".  Why?  what does qualify, what doesn't?
> 
> ...


Top post Danny


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> "in the case of Clarkson specifically (and in a lot of 'x is not a race' formulations) it is a matter of history, power relationships and linguistic habits."
> 
> I'm not sure what that means.  Is the "it" referring to your definition of racism? (This is probably me being slow).
> 
> ...





> In this struggle over speech, those who protest against restrictions are often characterized as bigots who want the freedom to use racist, misogynistic or homophobic language. But many free speech campaigners, myself included, view the right to freedom of expression as central to the struggle against bigotry. And then there are those who feel marginalized and voiceless, and express their estrangement from mainstream institutions by rejecting what they see as the liberal consensus.



The people missing from this handy round up of 'people with a stake in the debate' are those who feel the ramifications of certain types of language. As is often the case. The rest of us will duke it out, while the people who are actually called certain things and who feel the effects of an oppressive society sit quietly on the sidelines without any voice to say what they think. And do we care what they think? Of course not, because we've got our own positions to sell and defend.

As much as we might want to render the power of language inert or impotent, it isn't either of those things. We might say it _shouldn't_ be powerful, but it _is_. Saying it isn't doesn't make it so.

White people in the US in positions of power who call black people 'niggers' - stopping them from using that word won't change black/white relations or the power structure, but that language is one element of how control is still exerted. When the weight of everything is pressing down on you, some county sheriff calling you a 'no-good nigger' reinforces the absolute control they have.

"But you shouldn't let language have any control over you." Whoop-di-doo. That'll change the world, that will. The things people call you hurt. "Sticks and stones..." Yeah. Words drive people to suicide. They are powerful. What are we really arguing for? It's not a black/white "you can either say whatever you want with no consequences or all speech is banned by the central committee." This 'free speech is sacrosanct' stuff almost always ignores any mention of maintaining personal and collective _responsibility_ for the consequences of our speech. There is a middle lane. Somewhere in between "free speech ermahgerd" and "ban all nasty words" is "purposefully make positive, active steps towards a more empathic society where we understand that our words and actions have consequences, and while we have the ability to say whatever we want sometimes we should use our judgment and _not_ say something if it will cause harm," and yes, _harm_ can be something as simple as hurt feelings, because hurt feelings are rarely free from context but exist within a complex system of oppressions and aggressions that act on people day to day.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> For disclosure: I have no interest in the programme due to it not being my sort of entertainment. I find neither cars nor grown up schoolboys arsing around in them inherently interesting. That doesn't mean I am anti car... I would be equally unimpressed by a pitch which said "three blokey guys get up to hilarious scrapes with sofas".



Monkey tennis?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 22, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I wasn't. I was saying that _race_ isn't a scientific fact, but a social and political construct. That if someone is going to suggest Irishness isn't a race, then they need to define what they think a race is.
> 
> It's an argument you often see: "that can't be racism, as x, y or z aren't a race".  Why?  what does qualify, what doesn't?
> 
> ...



This.

The concept of separate races may be an artificial one and the definitions of those races arbitrary, but the fact is that society's dice are loaded according to those arbitrary distinctions. The use of derogatory language and stereotypes based on perceived racial differences is one of the ways such distinctions and the inequalities predicated on them are reinforced and upheld. So, 'I'm not being racist because the distinction between x and y doesn't exist' is not a valid argument. By using racist langauge, you're making that distinction yourself.

The fact that scientifically speaking there's no such thing as a race (not among humans anyway, we're far too inbred* to have separate races) doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist, it just means that racists are a) stupid and b) wrong.

*Or to put it another way we have unusually low genetic diversity as a species, considering our population size and the geographical range in which we live.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 22, 2015)

'Inbred' might not be the best term. I'd probably go with 'recent'.

In terms of time past the last serious population bottleneck.


----------



## gosub (Mar 23, 2015)

This thread is getting very far removed from a drink fuelled, steak related, alleged assault.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

gosub said:


> This thread is getting very far removed from a drink fuelled, steak related, alleged assault.


Your point?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> This.
> 
> The concept of separate races may be an artificial one and the definitions of those races arbitrary, but the fact is that society's dice are loaded according to those arbitrary distinctions. The use of derogatory language and stereotypes based on perceived racial differences is one of the ways such distinctions and the inequalities predicated on them are reinforced and upheld. So, 'I'm not being racist because the distinction between x and y doesn't exist' is not a valid argument. By using racist langauge, you're making that distinction yourself.
> 
> The fact that scientifically speaking there's no such thing as a race (not among humans anyway, we're far too inbred to have separate races) doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist, it just means that racists are a) stupid and b) wrong.


No problem with the first part here, but the second part seems to suggest that there _were_ races but they have been bred-away by 'race-mixing'. Pretty sure this isn't the ground for the argument that there are no races - if anything it's on the same ground as the biological race-realists.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> racists are a) stupid and b) wrong.


sadly many racists actually quite clever. but i suppose it makes you feel better to think them all stupider than you are.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2015)

I hesitated before replying to this post because I know that your heart is in the right place, but I've decided I can't leave it unanswered, because you have misrepresented Malik, and, possibly for rhetorical reasons, provided a phrase that readers of your post might take to be a direct quote from Malik.



Vintage Paw said:


> The people missing from this handy round up of 'people with a stake in the debate' are those who feel the ramifications of certain types of language. As is often the case. The rest of us will duke it out, while the people who are actually called certain things and who feel the effects of an oppressive society sit quietly on the sidelines without any voice to say what they think. And do we care what they think? Of course not, because we've got our own positions to sell and defend.


You're misreading Malik here.  If that's really the impression you've gained of his position, you should try reading some of his large body of work.  His anti-racism goes back a long way, as you'd expect from a British Asian with his roots in the left in the 80s.  You may remember the East London Workers Against Racism campaign, which he was heavily involved in, as well as  the Newham 7 campaign, the Afia Begum Campaign Against Deportations, and the Colin Roach Campaign.

It is a mistake to think that a position which says "it is counter-productive for the state to censor the speech of racists" means that racists should go unchallenged.  One can defend free speech and at the same time challenge stereotypes, challenge racist views, support the defence of communities against racism.

One of the central points Malik makes is that the way that mainstream society deals with race is not only _not_ working in protecting the most vulnerable and marginalised in society, including those in marginalised positions within the minority ethnic population, they are actually building institutionally racist structures which further oppress and marginalise those groups.  More than counter-productive, they've turned out to be actively regressive.  (I had a go at outlining some of the ways that works in this post, above).



> As much as we might want to render the power of language inert or impotent, it isn't either of those things. We might say it _shouldn't_ be powerful, but it _is_. Saying it isn't doesn't make it so.


You're not arguing against any case that Malik makes here.



> White people in the US in positions of power who call black people 'niggers' - stopping them from using that word won't change black/white relations or the power structure, but that language is one element of how control is still exerted. When the weight of everything is pressing down on you, some county sheriff calling you a 'no-good nigger' reinforces the absolute control they have.


He isn't saying that people should go around saying 'nigger'.  He would be just as clear as you or I what constitutes racist language.  Nor is he saying that language isn't powerful.  He's saying that policing language use hasn't changed society in the ways expected.  And that there are many dangerous precedents set by the thinking that is behind those ideas that has turned out to adversely effect the very people we might have hoped it'd protect.



> "But you shouldn't let language have any control over you."


That isn't a quote from Malik, not in this piece or any other that I'm aware of, and it's not his meaning either.  Quite the reverse in fact.



> Whoop-di-doo. That'll change the world, that will.


Here you are directing sarcasm at a "quote" you made up.  Malik didn't say what you put in inverted commas. Nor does anything in his piece suggest anything of the sort.  You are attacking a position that isn't expressed here.  Maybe it's expressed elsewhere by others, but not here.  Malik is no rightwing "libertarian".



> The things people call you hurt. "Sticks and stones..." Yeah. Words drive people to suicide. They are powerful. What are we really arguing for? It's not a black/white "you can either say whatever you want with no consequences or all speech is banned by the central committee." This 'free speech is sacrosanct' stuff almost always ignores any mention of maintaining personal and collective _responsibility_ for the consequences of our speech. There is a middle lane. Somewhere in between "free speech ermahgerd" and "ban all nasty words" is "purposefully make positive, active steps towards a more empathic society where we understand that our words and actions have consequences, and while we have the ability to say whatever we want sometimes we should use our judgment and _not_ say something if it will cause harm," and yes, _harm_ can be something as simple as hurt feelings, because hurt feelings are rarely free from context but exist within a complex system of oppressions and aggressions that act on people day to day.


One of the misunderstandings that frequently occurs when one opposes the state restricting free speech and free expression, is that people imagine that means one is saying that racists should be left to say and do what they want, unopposed.  It means nothing of the sort.  What racists say must be challenged.  That's an integral part of the package.

But if the state restricts what is said, then automatically, for some, rebellion against the Establishment becomes applauding when an over-privileged public schoolboy sniggers at slipping racist slurs past the censor.  Here's an _actual _quote from Malik's piece:

"It is a sad reflection on the contemporary world that rebelliousness has, for so many, been reduced to racist slurs and schoolboy pranks".

Malik, far from saying it's good, is saying it's bad.

I don't know about you, but from time to time I hear (usually) older people say something off colour, but correct themselves by saying "you're not supposed to say that now".  Not: "I apologize for the attitudes behind this".  For them, the problem is not the attitudes, but that they "not allowed" to say something.  They often have no real understanding why not.

I didn't see Trevor Philip's programme the other night, but I saw some of the reactions.  Malik, for example, groaned at the approach.  He said he may write a piece on it, but that his initial reaction is that his main problem with documentary was that there's a difference between saying we need open uncensored debate and suggesting that things that 'can't be said' are true.

But that's the problem, it is too easy for racist organisations to tap into that "we're not allowed to say this" attitude by saying "and the reason you're not allowed to say it is that They don't want you to know the Truth".  It's the old "if they're clamping down on this, there must be something in it" thing.

You can't legislate _opinions_ out of existence.  (You _can_ put in place anti-discrimination legislation to protect people in work, in housing, in many areas.  Those measures should be supported and strengthened. That's a different matter. Those are practical steps).

You should really read Malik.

The books I recommend are: _Strange Fruit_, mentioned above; _From Fatwa To Jihad: The Rushdie Affair And Its Legacy.
_
Here is one of his recent articles, to give you a flavour of his views:  https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/hatreds-old-and-new/


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> No problem with the first part here, but the second part seems to suggest that there _were_ races but they have been bred-away by 'race-mixing'. Pretty sure this isn't the ground for the argument that there are no races - if anything it's on the same ground as the biological race-realists.


Yes, i think it was just sloppy language, though.  8ball adequately corrects the science, though.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> No problem with the first part here, but the second part seems to suggest that there _were_ races but they have been bred-away by 'race-mixing'. Pretty sure this isn't the ground for the argument that there are no races - if anything it's on the same ground as the biological race-realists.



In biological terms, a race is a genetically distinct subgroup within a species. Humans don't have enough genetic diversity to yield any subgroups deserving of the term. That's not due to interbreeding between populations, it's simply because the human population grew exponentially from a very small number of individuals and did so relatively recently.

Interbreeding, or race-mixing as you put it, would be the opposite of inbreeding. But it doesn't make much difference because of the lack of human genetic diversity. There is less difference between the average African and the average European than between any two European individuals you might pick out, or any two Africans. If there was more variation between populations than within them then you'd be able to talk about separate races, but with humans there isn't.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

8ball said:


> 'Inbred' might not be the best term. I'd probably go with 'recent'.
> 
> In terms of time past the last serious population bottleneck.



Or this, yeah.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> but i suppose it makes you feel better to think them all stupider than you are.



Yes it does. Because I don't like to think about the alternative, namely people sitting down and deliberately thinking up a false basis for racist thought and behaviour. I know this has happened of course, I know racism was manufactured by some fairly clever people for some extremely dark purposes, but no I don't really like to think about it. 

Because stupidity can be fixed, evil not so much.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Because stupidity can be fixed, evil not so much.


i think you might have this arse over tit. so people can't change? for shame!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you might have this arse over tit. so people can't change? for shame!



People in general can change, but people who deliberately turn whole groups of people against one another for personal gain, or simply out of general malice? Only a good length of rope or a bullet can fix that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> People in general can change, but people who deliberately turn whole groups of people against one another for personal gain, or simply out of general malice? Only a good length of rope or a bullet can fix that.


you display a sorry lack of imagination.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Well I know there are more interesting ways of killing people but you're doing it out of social necessity. It's not supposed to be fun.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well I know there are more interesting ways of killing people but you're doing it out of social necessity. It's not supposed to be fun.


just thinking of hitler it took rather more than a length of rope or a bullet to get rid of him.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> In biological terms, a race is a genetically distinct subgroup within a species. Humans don't have enough genetic diversity to yield any subgroups deserving of the term. That's not due to interbreeding between populations, it's simply because the human population grew exponentially from a very small number of individuals and did so relatively recently.
> 
> Interbreeding, or race-mixing as you put it, would be the opposite of inbreeding. But it doesn't make much difference because of the lack of human genetic diversity. There is less difference between the average African and the average European than between any two European individuals you might pick out, or any two Africans. If there was more variation between populations than within them then you'd be able to talk about separate races, but with humans there isn't.


Why connect 'inbreeding' with race at all though? Taken all the above on board as correct has led to the racists that i'm talking about replacing _culture_ for race - and the 'inbreeding' within the various human _cultures_ as harmful and so effectively a surrogate for their old-school biological race-mixing. This is a major point for contemporary racism - and i think using inbred concedes a little something to them. I know it's as danny says above, but i just wanted to highlight that development in modern  racial thinking whilst everyone else was talking about biological racism.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Why connect 'inbreeding' with race at all though? Taken all the above on board as correct has led to the racists that i'm talking about replacing _culture_ for race - and the 'inbreeding' within the various human _cultures_ as harmful and so effectively a surrogate for their old-school biological race-mixing. This is a major point for contemporary racism - and i think using inbred concedes a little something to them. I know it's as danny says above, but i just wanted to highlight that development in modern  racial thinking whilst everyone else was talking about biological racism.


Yes, however unintentional the slip, it's worth pointing out the implications.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Interbreeding, or race-mixing as you put it, would be the opposite of inbreeding. But it doesn't make much difference because of the lack of human genetic diversity. There is less difference between the average African and the average European than between any two European individuals you might pick out, or any two Africans. If there was more variation between populations than within them then you'd be able to talk about separate races, but with humans there isn't.


That's not strictly true, I don't think. Unless more recent research has contradicted this, last I read, there is more genetic difference between two Africans on average, even if they're from the same region, than between any two non-Africans. 

And the characteristics that can predominate in certain local populations, giving them a particular 'look', are due in most part to genetic drift, ie what most people would probably understand as inbreeding.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not strictly true, I don't think. Unless more recent research has contradicted this, last I read, there is more genetic difference between two Africans on average, even if they're from the same region, than between any two non-Africans.
> 
> And the characteristics that can predominate in certain local populations, giving them a particular 'look', are due in most part to genetic drift, ie what most people would probably understand as inbreeding.


perhaps instead of glibly saying 'last i read' you could give some indication of what you read.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps instead of glibly saying 'last i read' you could give some indication of what you read.


Stephen Oppenheimer


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Stephen Oppenheimer


a search of google scholar for author:stephen author: oppenheimer returns 211 results once patents and citations are removed. perhaps you could give some indication of what work by him you read.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> a search of google scholar for author:stephen author: oppenheimer returns 279 results. perhaps you could give some indication of what work by him you read.


Out of eden. 

He also has a website.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Out of eden.
> 
> He also has a website.


not that hard when you put your mind to it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Why connect 'inbreeding' with race at all though? Taken all the above on board as correct has led to the racists that i'm talking about replacing _culture_ for race - and the 'inbreeding' within the various human _cultures_ as harmful and so effectively a surrogate for their old-school biological race-mixing. This is a major point for contemporary racism - and i think using inbred concedes a little something to them. I know it's as danny says above, but i just wanted to highlight that development in modern  racial thinking whilst everyone else was talking about biological racism.



Once again, you've got inbreeding and interbreeding mixed up here I think. But I take your point. I was looking at it with my biologist hat on, and in biology words like 'interbreeding' are pleasantly implication-free. I can see why those words cause problems in this context though.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not strictly true, I don't think. Unless more recent research has contradicted this, last I read, there is more genetic difference between two Africans on average, even if they're from the same region, than between any two non-Africans.



It's the differences between populations that I was talking about though. One population may well be more diverse than another, that doesn't necessarily affect how closely related those two populations are iyswim. So maybe your two randomly chosen Africans will be more different from each other than are your two randomly selected Europeans (bearing in mind that among many other factors, there are more people in Africa than in Europe), but the average difference between African and European populations will still be less than the difference between either of those pairs of individuals.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 23, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> So I'm told. I keep meaning to get round to it, but it seems a daunting prospect.
> 
> I'm currently working through Star Trek ( TOS, of course; i don't count any spin off as being actual Star Trek).



Surely ST is more daunting than BB? I've done the latter and working through the former too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's the differences between populations that I was talking about though. One population may well be more diverse than another, that doesn't necessarily affect how closely related those two populations are iyswim. So maybe your two randomly chosen Africans will be more different from each other than are your two randomly selected Europeans (bearing in mind that among many other factors, there are more people in Africa than in Europe), but the average difference between African and European populations will still be less than the difference between either of those pairs of individuals.


OK, I see what you're saying.

It's more than just difference between Europeans, though - average genetic difference between two Africans is more than that between any two non-Africans, so a European and an Aboriginal Australian, say, or a South American Amerindian and a Pakistani.

ETA: I think this is worth mentioning because the basis for 'scientific racism' in the 19th century was the existence of 'white races', 'black races', 'yellow races', etc. And idiotically these implicit assumptions about how to split up humanity still crop up even now.


----------



## cesare (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> OK, I see what you're saying.
> 
> It's more than just difference between Europeans, though - average genetic difference between two Africans is more than that between any two non-Africans, so a European and an Aboriginal Australian, say, or a South American Amerindian and a Pakistani.
> 
> ETA: I think this is worth mentioning because the basis for 'scientific racism' in the 19th century was the existence of 'white races', 'black races', 'yellow races', etc. And idiotically these implicit assumptions about how to split humanity up still crop up even now.


Not sure why you've introduced a nationality into that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> OK, I see what you're saying.
> 
> It's more than just difference between Europeans, though - average genetic difference between two Africans is more than that between any two non-Africans, so a European and an Aboriginal Australian, say, or a South American Amerindian and a Pakistani.
> 
> ETA: I think this is worth mentioning because the basis for 'scientific racism' in the 19th century was the existence of 'white races', 'black races', 'yellow races', etc. And idiotically these implicit assumptions about how to split up humanity still crop up even now.


is everyone from pakistan of one group? are there no pakistanis of european descent?

not to mention: how long does one group live in e.g. africa before they become african? is, for example, f.w. de klerk african?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> Not sure why you've introduced a nationality into that.


No deep reason. I was just trying to come up with egs of people from different parts of the world, that's all.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not to mention: how long does one group live in e.g. africa before they become african? is, for example, f.w. de klerk african?


I know you're trying to pick holes and somehow show me up, but the 'on average' bit deals with that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know you're trying to pick holes and somehow show me up, but the 'on average' bit deals with that.


no, it doesn't.


----------



## cesare (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No deep reason. I was just trying to come up with egs of people from different parts of the world, that's all.


South Asian probably less likely to be picked up on.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

cesare said:


> South Asian probably less likely to be picked up on.


Ok, fair enough.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no, it doesn't.


It really does. 

Anyway, I'll not be replying to you any more on this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It really does.
> 
> Anyway, I'll not be replying to you any more on this.


when i ask 'how long does a group have to live in africa before you consider them african' then your 'on average' answer doesn't, er, answer the question. do you see? do you understand the question? i don't think you do or you wouldn't be throwing a hissy fit over it.

e2a: i don't expect a reply but i would hope you'd think about why your answer didn't suit the question.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> OK, I see what you're saying.
> 
> It's more than just difference between Europeans, though - average genetic difference between two Africans is more than that between any two non-Africans, so a European and an Aboriginal Australian, say, or a South American Amerindian and a Pakistani.
> 
> ETA: I think this is worth mentioning because the basis for 'scientific racism' in the 19th century was the existence of 'white races', 'black races', 'yellow races', etc. And idiotically these implicit assumptions about how to split up humanity still crop up even now.


just to clarify: would you say that someone who is an arab in e.g. libya whose ancestors migrated in, say, the 1400s was african? pls define 'african'. or is 'african' a term which we all understand and is not problematick in any way? just restating my earlier question in a way you might find more palatable or indeed easier to answer.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> just to clarify: would you say that someone who is an arab in e.g. libya whose ancestors migrated in, say, the 1400s was african? pls define 'african'. or is 'african' a term which we all understand and is not problematick in any way? just restating my earlier question in a way you might find more palatable or indeed easier to answer.



Just to clarify, are you implying that the word 'African' is racist? Or are you just being needlessly difficult?

If you can find a way to discuss these issues without using any words that are in any way open to interpretation, not universally understood or potentially problematic then I'm sure we'd all be delighted to hear about it. LBJ has already stated the source she's referring to, I'm sure that will contain a detailed explanation of the methods and analysis involved if you're really that interested.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just to clarify, are you implying that the word 'African' is racist? Or are you just being needlessly difficult?
> 
> If you can find a way to discuss these issues without using any words that are in any way open to interpretation, not universally understood or potentially problematic then I'm sure we'd all be delighted to hear about it.


just to clarify: do you post as littlebabyjesus? when i want to know what YOU think i will ask you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> just to clarify: do you post as littlebabyjesus? when i want to know what YOU think i will ask you.



You probably should have sent a PM then, this is an open forum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just to clarify, are you implying that the word 'African' is racist? Or are you just being needlessly difficult?
> 
> If you can find a way to discuss these issues without using any words that are in any way open to interpretation, not universally understood or potentially problematic then I'm sure we'd all be delighted to hear about it. LBJ has already stated the source she's referring to, I'm sure that will contain a detailed explanation of the methods and analysis involved if you're really that interested.


Yep. Pretty much standard for all ethnographers to open up their books or papers with a discussion of terms and a rationale for the terms they choose to use - what they mean by those terms and what they _don't_ mean by them. 

And Frank meet Pickman's. He's needlessly difficult.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> You probably should have sent a PM then, this is an open forum.


yeh and i'm free to reply to you as i did above, as you replied to me above.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. Pretty much standard for all ethnographers to open up their books or papers with a discussion of terms and a rationale for the terms they choose to use - what they mean by those terms and what they _don't_ mean by them.
> 
> And Frank meet Pickman's. He's needlessly difficult.


SpookyFrank littlebabyjesus will, as you see, run off at the first hint of a tricky question.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> LBJ has already stated the source she's referring to


littlebabyjesus, I've always assumed you were a he, probably because I associate Jesus with being a boy's name.  If that is not the case, I apologise for any times I have applied the wrong gender pronouns.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

I am still a boy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I am still a boy.


----------



## BandWagon (Mar 23, 2015)

Apologies if already posted:

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/03/22/interview-with-jeremy-clarksons-waiter/


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> SpookyFrank littlebabyjesus will, as you see, run off at the first hint of a tricky question.



Actually I had to go to work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Actually I had to go to work.


no, i was saying to you that lbj will run off at the first hint of a tricky question. where you are, were, or will be are matters of supreme indifference to me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i was saying to you that lbj will run off at the first hint of a tricky question.



Maybe it's sarcastic rehtorical questions LBJ doesn't care for, rather than tricky ones?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2015)

Sometimes one has to trust that the thread will understand why one hasn't replied.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

BandWagon said:


> Apologies if already posted:
> 
> http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/03/22/interview-with-jeremy-clarksons-waiter/


I wonder what he's really saying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sometimes one has to trust that the thread will understand why one hasn't replied.


generally because one doesn't have the wherewithal to supply an adequate response. it might, one might suppose, be relatively simple to supply a definition of 'african'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Maybe it's sarcastic rehtorical questions LBJ doesn't care for, rather than tricky ones?


it might be. but as there're no sarcastick rhetorical questions in my posts i believe you to be barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

zzzzzzz


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> zzzzzzz


always good to see you contribute to a thread


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

I have contributed, extensively. This latest exchange is of only interest to yourself, with your unfathomable agenda.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I have contributed, extensively. This latest exchange is of only interest to yourself, with your unfathomable agenda.


at least my posts are of interest to someone. i can't see anyone, even you, being interested in some of the things you chose to share.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

just listen to yourself. you sound like a schoolkid


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 23, 2015)

Latest revelation from the BBC. David Cameron's daughter has threatened to go on hunger strike if Clarkson is not reinstated. To me this reflects badly on Cameron who has bought up this girl. He must not be allowed to continue running the country.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 23, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Latest revelation from the BBC. David Cameron's daughter has threatened to go on hunger strike if Clarkson is not reinstated. To me this reflects badly on Cameron who has bought up this girl. He must not be allowed to continue running the country.


Fine by me!

There is a Cameron quote going round today saying he would not stand for a third term, bit presumptious, and the cheeky git didn't even get properly elected for a first term!


----------



## belboid (Mar 23, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Latest revelation from the BBC. David Cameron's daughter has threatened to go on hunger strike if Clarkson is not reinstated. To me this reflects badly on Cameron who has bought up this girl. He must not be allowed to continue running the country.


the coward can't bring himself to say that the BBC shouldn't sack a violent racist, so he lets his daughter do it for him


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> just listen to yourself. you sound like a schoolkid


did you just say that? 

you sound like a patronising wanker. what does a schoolkid sound like?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 23, 2015)

why do you do this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> why do you do this?


what, why do i act all passive aggressive, not quoting the person i want a reply from?



oh - no, that's the way you behave, together with your 'zzzzzz' nonsense and your pathetic ageist insults.

moving on...


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 24, 2015)

Now Cameron's using his kid to get his thug of a mate back on the telly.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...on-top-gear-10129318.html?cmpid=facebook-post

Now that's a cunt's trick. 

But check out the reportage.


> Nancy Cameron is following in the footsteps of Mahatma Gandhiand the Suffragettes by going on hunger strike.
> 
> But, unlike the great Indian leader or votes of women campaigners, her protest isn't to do with the British occupation or gender injustice, but to get Jeremy Clarkson back on _Top Gear._


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 24, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Now Cameron's using his kid to get his thug of a mate back on the telly.
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...on-top-gear-10129318.html?cmpid=facebook-post
> 
> Now that's a cunt's trick.
> ...


One less Tory sprog to feed when she goes the way of Bobby Sands then


----------



## rover07 (Mar 24, 2015)

Hahaha brilliant. Is that from the Daily Mash?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

i foresee a new cult of martyrs. richard hammond pierced by arrows. james may stoned to death by mexicans. jeremy clarkson crushed by irish children standing on the door of a trabant


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> i foresee a new cult of martyrs. richard hammond pierced by arrows. james may stoned to death by mexicans. jeremy clarkson crushed by irish children standing on the door of a trabant


who will see them as martyrs?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Picky is funny.  I don't blame people for not engaging though. It's beyond the event horizon.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> who will see them as martyrs?


it's an imaginary scenario. Clarksonites seem to number in their millions though


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> it's an imaginary scenario. Clarksonites seem to number in their millions though



1,030,000 is a lot of people, but Top Gear has worldwide viewing figures of 350 million.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> 1,030,000 is a lot of people, but Top Gear has worldwide viewing figures of 350 million.


from acorns, mighty oaks do grow.
imagine a clarksonian world.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> 1,030,000 is a lot of people, but Top Gear has worldwide viewing figures of 350 million.


How many of them are pretending their children are on hunger strike?


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> from acorns, mighty oaks do grow.
> imagine a clarksonian world.



Have you ever been to Oxfordshire?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> 1,030,000 is a lot of people, but Top Gear has worldwide viewing figures of 350 million.


No it doesn't.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Have you ever been to Oxfordshire?


yes, it's a horrifying prospect. chipping norton as the new jerusalem


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

An instruction in how authority works this - a figure is given, then repeated then repeated as authoritative and as confirming the original unsourced claim. Then quote the original figure.

350 million my anus.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> An instruction in how authority works this - a figure is given, then repeated then repeated as authoritative and as confirming the original unsourced claim. Then quote the original figure.
> 
> 350 million my anus.


It seems a perfectly plausible figure though


----------



## Belushi (Mar 24, 2015)

Surely Cameron is going to have to follow his heroines example and let her starve?  The country can't be held to ransom by little posh girls.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It seems a perfectly plausible figure though


how? a few million maybe, but hundreds? fuck off!


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> An instruction in how authority works this - a figure is given, then repeated then repeated as authoritative and as confirming the original unsourced claim. Then quote the original figure.
> 
> 350 million my anus.



To be fair the BBC have used it themselves. At any rate it has a large worldwide audience, the popularity of a poll publicised by a right wing cunt with many followers about a right wing cunt shouldn't be completely unexpected.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It seems a perfectly plausible figure though


Is it? That's not the same as a sourced figure. Have a look for it. Find the source. You will not be able to. It's a figure that just goes round and round-and, as it's key to lot of the support if gets, well _produce the source.
_
(not you, but them)


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 24, 2015)

i read three mill domestic and 15 ww earlier in the thread. guardian source iirc


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> To be fair the BBC have used it themselves. At any rate it has a large worldwide audience, the popularity of a poll publicised by a right wing cunt with many followers about a right wing cunt shouldn't be completely unexpected.


Where have they used it?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> how? a few million maybe, but hundreds? fuck off!


I think you underestimate the appeal of it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> i read three mill domestic and 15 ww earlier in the thread. guardian source iirc


15 million pricks


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Where have they used it?



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31832534
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31832698


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Is it? That's not the same as a sourced figure. Have a look for it. Find the source. You will not be able to. It's a figure that just goes round and round-and, as it's key to lot of the support if gets, well produce the figure.


Oh I get that, but I think it might not be that far from the truth.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31832534
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31832698


1) Unsourced
2) Same.

Proving my point.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

If the BBC said it it must be true. But they didn't say it did they?


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> i read three mill domestic and 15 ww earlier in the thread. guardian source iirc



5.83 domestic for the last original broadcast.


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 24, 2015)

One billion and counting cos I said so.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> If the BBC said it it must be true. But they didn't say it did they?



I'm not disagreeing with you.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> 5.83 domestic for the last original broadcast.


fucking hell, what a world we live in


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> 15 million pricks



I don't mean this as an insult, but one thing that often irritates me about your posts is that kind of baffled intolerance of anyone whose tastes differ from yours.  'I don't like it, I don't understand why anyone else does, and if they do there must be something wrong with them.'  

I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy _Top Gear_ and I'll be sorry if this is the end of it.  I don't like Clarkson's views and I don't like some of the humour, but I do enjoy watching them rag around in supercars I'll only ever be able to dream about, and I do like the arsing about with turning cars into boats and caravans into airships, doing ridiculously hard drives in ridiculously inappropriate/elderly cars, and so on.  I don't see anything wrong with that, and tbh I take offence at being labelled a 'prick' because of it.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> fucking hell, what a world we live in



Why, do you think everyone that watches top gear is inherently a cunt?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It seems a perfectly plausible figure though



Six times the population of England watch Top Gear?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Six times the population of England watch Top Gear?


Cids got five and change. If we say thats 5 mill per 40 (electorate size uk iirc), count population total for all countries its broadcast, then 5 for every 40 mill in that total gives us back of fag packet guess

e2a the 'and change is .86 so round up. 6 in every 40 x population of countries its broadcast in)


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Six times the population of England watch Top Gear?



Broadcast in 212 territories, Guiness world record for most watched 'factual' programme 2013.

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/guiness-book-of-records-2012-09-07
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com...to-guinness-world-records-2013-edition-44693/
http://advertising.bbcworldwide.com/home/mediakit/reachaudience/topgear


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I don't mean this as an insult, but one thing that often irritates me about your posts is that kind of baffled intolerance of anyone whose tastes differ from yours.  'I don't like it, I don't understand why anyone else does, and if they do there must be something wrong with them.'
> 
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy _Top Gear_ and I'll be sorry if this is the end of it.  I don't like Clarkson's views and I don't like some of the humour, but I do enjoy watching them rag around in supercars I'll only ever be able to dream about, and I do like the arsing about with turning cars into boats and caravans into airships, doing ridiculously hard drives in ridiculously inappropriate/elderly cars, and so on.  I don't see anything wrong with that, and tbh I take offence at being labelled a 'prick' because of it.


fair enough, but a lot of fans seem to excusing the presenters just cos they like cars. they're all arseholes and i don't want them on the telly. fuck em (and you) if they go along with these poisonous arseholes. 

though i think danny la rouge  said it best about sitting on a sofa a lot but not wanting to watch a programme in which conceited bellends talk about sofas.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Why, do you think everyone that watches top gear is inherently a cunt?


only a small part of me thinks that, but a larger part of me is more exasperated with normal nice people who tolerate pricks like clarkson, may and hammond, just cos they like cars.


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> fair enough, but a lot of fans seem to excusing the presenters just cos they like cars. they're all arseholes and i don't want them on the telly. fuck em (and you) if they go along with these poisonous arseholes.



The fact you've responded in such a petulant way speaks volumes IMO.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Broadcast in 212 territories, Guiness world record for most watched 'factual' programme 2013.
> 
> http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/guiness-book-of-records-2012-09-07
> http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com...to-guinness-world-records-2013-edition-44693/
> http://advertising.bbcworldwide.com/home/mediakit/reachaudience/topgear



It doesn't give any viewing figures. Michael Jackson's Thriller is supposedly  the best selling album ever with 50 million units shifted. Top Gear is seven times this?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> The fact you've responded in such a petulant way speaks volumes IMO.


i'm just feeling really annoyed and alienated from the rest of the population cos people seem to be giving these bigots a pass just cos they're into cars. this has been going on a long time. it's not just the latest incident. Top Gear is strewn with bellendry.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Broadcast in 212 territories, Guiness world record for most watched 'factual' programme 2013.
> 
> http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/guiness-book-of-records-2012-09-07
> http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com...to-guinness-world-records-2013-edition-44693/
> http://advertising.bbcworldwide.com/home/mediakit/reachaudience/topgear


See - you can look and look and you will not be able to source that 350 million figure.

You/others can/will/have repeated it.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> See - you can look and look and you will not be able to source that million figure.



Yes, I agree. I have no attachment to the 350 million figure.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Yes, I agree. I have no attachment to the 350 million figure.


It's the fact that it came to mind at all that i'm on about - i entered here saying that this is how authority works, by producing an air of validity around all it claims - this 350 million claim is an example. It's everywhere (and i'm not having a pop at you or the claim).


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It's the fact that it came to mind at all that i'm on about - i entered here saying that this is how authority works, by producing an air of validity around all it claims - this 350 million claim is an example. It's everywhere (and i'm not having a pop at you or the claim).



Ah yeah, fair enough - it is interesting.


----------



## binka (Mar 24, 2015)

it's like the bullshit claim that more than 2 billion people watched the royal wedding
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...7/Royal-wedding-watched-around-the-world.html
or that a billion people watch the superbowl
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index...by-anywhere-near-a-billion-people-every-year/


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It doesn't give any viewing figures. Michael Jackson's Thriller is supposedly  the best selling album ever with 50 million units shifted. Top Gear is seven times this?



To embark on another possibly completely deluded reference to authority, viewing figures for the Beijing opening ceremony were 1.2bn+.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> only a small part of me thinks that, but a larger part of me is more exasperated with normal nice people who tolerate pricks like clarkson, may and hammond, just cos they like cars.


 
I think James May is probably alright when kept away from bad influences.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It doesn't give any viewing figures. Michael Jackson's Thriller is supposedly  the best selling album ever with 50 million units shifted. Top Gear is seven times this?



And this is the TOTAL sale figures for Thriller including reprints for CDs, MP3s etc.

We're comparing it with viewing figures for ONE episode of Top Gear worldwide.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> To embark on another possibly completely deluded reference to authority, viewing figures for the Beijing opening ceremony were 1.2bn+.



So we're arguing that an episode of Top Gear is a quarter of that?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Six times the population of England watch Top Gear?


He world is a big place with a lot of people In it. It's a perfectly plausible figure.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> And this is the TOTAL sale figures for Thriller including reprints for CDs, MP3s etc.
> 
> We're comparing it with viewing figures for ONE episode of Top Gear worldwide.



Album sales aren't a good comparison... e.g Pharell Williams Happy has 310m unique plays on spotify (source, I just checked spotify).


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> He world is a big place with a lot of people In it. It's a perfectly plausible figure.



I don't think the BBC grossing £50 million a year from the franchise reflects a global audience of 350 million per episode.


----------



## Santino (Mar 24, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I don't mean this as an insult, but one thing that often irritates me about your posts is that kind of baffled intolerance of anyone whose tastes differ from yours.  'I don't like it, I don't understand why anyone else does, and if they do there must be something wrong with them.'
> 
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy _Top Gear_ and I'll be sorry if this is the end of it.  I don't like Clarkson's views and I don't like some of the humour, but I do enjoy watching them rag around in supercars I'll only ever be able to dream about, and I do like the arsing about with turning cars into boats and caravans into airships, doing ridiculously hard drives in ridiculously inappropriate/elderly cars, and so on.  I don't see anything wrong with that, and tbh I take offence at being labelled a 'prick' because of it.


How do you feel about the racism?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> He world is a big place with a lot of people In it. It's a perfectly plausible figure.


Why?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Album sales aren't a good comparison... e.g Pharell Williams Happy has 310m unique plays on spotify (source, I just checked spotify).



On one evening?


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> On one evening?



No, but do you think 5.83 million people in the UK sit down to Thriller every weekend? It's a different type of media with different patterns of consumption.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Album sales aren't a good comparison... e.g Pharell Williams Happy has 310m unique plays on spotify (source, I just checked spotify).



If you want to go down this route Pharrell Williams has 650M views on his top YouTube result whilst Top Gear has 100,000 views on their top result.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Where are the other plausible 345 million plausibly?


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If you want to go down this route Pharrell Williams has 650M views on his top YouTube result whilst Top Gear has 100,000 views on their top result.



Nope, 24.4 million on their Veyron vs Jet.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> No, but do you think 5.83 million people in the UK sit down to Thriller every weekend? It's a different type of media with different patterns of consumption.



This strengthens my argument rather than weaken it, no?


----------



## DRINK? (Mar 24, 2015)

Top gear would probably be ok if it didn't have Clarkson and the two fawning bum lickers...anyone who records it is a bit of a wrong un in my eyes


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Why?


Why not? Broadcast im over 200 countries, an entertaining format that appeals to a base wider than many on his thread give credit for.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> Nope, 24.4 million on their Veyron vs Jet.



So ten times less than their viewing figures for an episode then. How does Pharrell Williams compare?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

350 million is more than watched the 2006 World Cup final (according to research linked to from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_watched_television_broadcasts anyway).


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Why not? Broadcast im over 200 countries, an entertaining format that appeals to a base wider than many on his thread give credit for.


At it's height in its own country it gets 5 million - so it has to get 1.7 million min _across 200 other countries - every single one_. I think that's PR fantasy.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So ten times less than their viewing figures for an episode then. How does Pharrell Williams compare?



Sorry, it's 18 times less not 10.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Why not? Broadcast im over 200 countries, an entertaining format that appeals to a base wider than many on his thread give credit for.


You like Jeremy Clarkson. You like Jeremy Clarkson!


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> So ten times less than their viewing figures for an episode then. How does Pharrell Williams compare?



I was just pointing out that your albums sales ref isn't really relevant. Many different types of media, different patterns of viewing. Usain Bolt's 100m has 12m views... how many people do you think watched that live?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> I was just pointing out that your albums sales ref isn't really relevant. Many different types of media, different patterns of viewing. Usain Bolt's 100m has 12m views... how many people do you think watched that live?


8 million


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Mar 24, 2015)

I highly doubt that roughly 1 in every 20 people worldwide sit down and watch the latest Top Gear as it happens.  To me it seems quite plausible that that many have watched an episode at some point though;  it's on pretty much all the time in the UK and it's been sent to the four corners of the earth and back.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> 8 million


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

If we're playing the comparisons game surely this is the killer?



FridgeMagnet said:


> 350 million is more than watched the 2006 World Cup final (according to research linked to from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_watched_television_broadcasts anyway).


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> If we're playing the comparisons game surely this is the killer?



I think in the absence of actual figures we could argue about this all night and get nowhere.


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 24, 2015)

Santino said:


> How do you feel about the racism?



Need you ask?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> I think in the absence of actual figures we could argue about this all night and get nowhere.



Which is what Urban is all about after all.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Which is what Urban is all about after all.



I've got an essay in for midday tomorrow. 

What do you think their figures would be?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> At it's height in its own country it gets 5 million - so it has to get 1.7 million min _across 200 other countries - every single one_. I think that's PR fantasy.



But the 5mio is "live" viewers all watching at the time of the first broadcast of a single episode. The 350mio figure would include repeats and individuals who watch the show _every now and then_, not people watching it at the same time.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> But the 5mio is "live" viewers all watching at the time of the first broadcast of a single episode. The 350mio figure would include repeats and individuals who watch the show _every now and then_, not people watching it at the same time.


Excellent it includes people not watching it too.

Can you say where you came across the methodology for the 350 million claim please? The 'would' in your post.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> I've got an essay in for midday tomorrow.
> 
> What do you think their figures would be?



Get on with it and stop procrastinating


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I don't mean this as an insult, but one thing that often irritates me about your posts is that kind of baffled intolerance of anyone whose tastes differ from yours.  'I don't like it, I don't understand why anyone else does, and if they do there must be something wrong with them.'
> 
> I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy _Top Gear_ and I'll be sorry if this is the end of it.  I don't like Clarkson's views and I don't like some of the humour, but I do enjoy watching them rag around in supercars I'll only ever be able to dream about, and I do like the arsing about with turning cars into boats and caravans into airships, doing ridiculously hard drives in ridiculously inappropriate/elderly cars, and so on.  I don't see anything wrong with that, and tbh I take offence at being labelled a 'prick' because of it.


to come back to this. i like and respect you as a poster and a person, but feel that, aside from the presenters being awful bastards, the whole show promotes and glamourises performance cars without regard to their environmental impact and contribution to materialism. i don't think cars should be regarded these days as anything more than a dreadful necessity. I work in a boys' school and they all want performance cars when they grow up, partly due to watching programmes such as Top Gear. I don't think this should be encouraged for both environmental reasons and anti-materialist reasons. many people still seem to be 'glamoured' by nice cars, despite their political and environmental credentials and i think this is a shame.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> But the 5mio is "live" viewers all watching at the time of the first broadcast of a single episode. The 350mio figure would include repeats and individuals who watch the show _every now and then_, not people watching it at the same time.


As it goes, a large part of the 350 million bollocks was about that precise audience watching it live.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Get on with it and stop procrastinating



Thanks... 

Later all.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> to come back to this. i like and respect you as a poster and a person, but feel that, aside from the presenters being awful bastards, the whole show promotes and glamourises performance cars without regard to their environmental impact and contribution to materialism. i don't think cars should be regarded these days as anything more than a dreadful necessity. I work in a boys' school and they all want performance cars when they grow up, partly due to watching programmes such as Top Gear. I don't think this should be encouraged for both environmental reasons and anti-materialist reasons. many people still seem to be 'glamoured' by nice cars, despite their political and environmental credentials and i think this is a shame.


Oh no don't. You were doing so well.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

It's hilarious that people are now trying to 'explain' the figure. 

Either they have a captive broadcast audience of 350M or they don't. None of this 'oh the dog watches too' shit.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Oh no don't. You were doing so well.


just explaining why i think it's not just about racist presenters.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> just explaining why i think it's not just about racist presenters.


But your point is that it's actually about tutting at other people because of their choices! It really really isn't. Or, if it is, count me out.

Posh bloke, racist on my dollar, violent to workers - no thanks. That's it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> But your point is that it's actually about tutting at other people because of their choices! It really really isn't. Or, if it is, count me out.


ok, but it mainly tutting at other people who are seeking to excuse others' behaviour cos they present programmes on things they're into.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

Cid said:


> I think in the absence of actual figures we could argue about this all night and get nowhere.


Well, we have a lot of sources for figures on other things on TV, but apparently none for Top Gear. Under those circumstances I'd be inclined to conclude "we don't actually know how many people watch Top Gear and that figure sounds really bizarre if it's meant to be the number of people who watch each episode".


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> As it goes, a large part of the 350 million bollocks was about that precise audience watching it live.



What are you basing that on? 

If 5mio+ viewers watched a particular episode all at once, I'd bet your house that a fuckload more watched other episodes but not that one. They'll all be _viewers_.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> ok, but it mainly tutting at other people who are seeking to excuse others' behaviour cos they present programmes on things they're into.


And when you were on that level you were right, but then you ruined it with the moralistic stuff - that's the same level as most of the defenders are on. It's been an odd thread mind.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> What are you basing that on?
> 
> If 5mio+ viewers watched a particular episode all at once, I'd bet your house that a fuckload more watched other episodes but not that one. They'll all be _viewers_.


Why did you ignore my previous question to you? Where did you find the methodology for your claim of what would constitute the 350 million? Quite important that. Look forward to your answer.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 24, 2015)

Just as a data point, let's look at the USA. BBC America is available to 78 million households (per wiki), but it isn't part of any basic package - it's a paid add-on. I couldn't find Top Gear ratings, but their highest ever viewing figure was 2.47 million for Matt Smith's regeneration episode in Doctor Who. So in likely the largest non-UK market for Top Gear, we are talking a couple of million tops. That 350 million figure is looking a long way off.


----------



## Roadkill (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> to come back to this. i like and respect you as a poster and a person, but feel that, aside from the presenters being awful bastards, the whole show promotes and glamourises performance cars without regard to their environmental impact and contribution to materialism. i don't think cars should be regarded these days as anything more than a dreadful necessity. I work in a boys' school and they all want performance cars when they grow up, partly due to watching programmes such as Top Gear. I don't think this should be encouraged for both environmental reasons and anti-materialist reasons. many people still seem to be 'glamoured' by nice cars, despite their political and environmental credentials and i think this is a shame.



Sorry, but that's patronising, pious nonsense.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> You like Jeremy Clarkson. You like Jeremy Clarkson!


It is perfectly possible to think Clarkson is a vile man whilst still enjoying watching the latest Ferrari being driven to its limits just after a caravan has been blown to bits.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> to come back to this. i like and respect you as a poster and a person, but feel that, aside from the presenters being awful bastards, the whole show promotes and glamourises performance cars without regard to their environmental impact and contribution to materialism. i don't think cars should be regarded these days as anything more than a dreadful necessity. I work in a boys' school and they all want performance cars when they grow up, partly due to watching programmes such as Top Gear. I don't think this should be encouraged for both environmental reasons and anti-materialist reasons. many people still seem to be 'glamoured' by nice cars, despite their political and environmental credentials and i think this is a shame.


What godawful pious wank.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Why did you ignore my previous question to you? Where did you find the methodology for your claim of what would constitute the 350 million?



I just did, above. I only used the 350 number because that's what's being mentioned here. It could be 100mio or a billion for all I know.

My contention is that when they talk of xxx million worldwide viewers they're referring to folk who watch various episodes of the show regularly, be that live or on repeat broadcasts.

You're saying they're referring to 350mio all watching the same show. Why do you think that?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2015)

Taxi for Orang Utan!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> And when you were on that level you were right, but then you ruined it with the moralistic stuff - that's the same level as most of the defenders are on. It's been an odd thread mind.


fair enough, this thread has really got my goat, not just with the racist defenders, but with the car worship that the programmes promotes. i admit this is a personal bugbear. it's not just about liking one music over another though.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> What are you basing that on?
> 
> If 5mio+ viewers watched a particular episode all at once, I'd bet your house that a fuckload more watched other episodes but not that one. They'll all be _viewers_.



You got this from my 'dog watching it' remark. 

What happens if someone goes for a piss or to cook dinner halfway through. Are they lumped in as audience too?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Taxi for Orang Utan!


my bicycle will do


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> I just did, above. I only used the 350 number because that's what's being mentioned here. It could be 100mio or a billion for all I know.
> 
> My contention is that when they talk of xxx million viewers they're referring to folk who watch various episodes of the show regularly, be that live or on repeat broadcasts.
> 
> You're saying they're referring to 350mio all watching the same show. Why do you think that?


No you did not. You said the 350 million 'would' include various things - point to the thing that resulted in 350 million that included what you chose to. Source us up.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> What happens if someone goes for a piss or to cook dinner halfway through. Are they lumped in as audience too?



Of course!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Of course!


Where? What infernal machine? Where?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> What godawful pious wank.


on the contrary


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

Did I miss the bit where the 350 million figure was sourced from anywhere btw?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> No you did not. You said the 350 million 'would' include various things - point to the thing that resulted in 350 million that included what you chose to. Source us up.



Ah ok, how about I append IMO to that _would_?

Now make me wrong and evidence this:



> As it goes, a large part of the 350 million bollocks was about that precise audience watching it live.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> fair enough, this thread has really got my goat, not just with the racist defenders, but with the car worship that the programmes promotes. i admit this is a personal bugbear. it's not just about liking one music over another though.



This would be going better on one of the vegetarian cyclist threads.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Ah ok, how about I append IMO to that?
> 
> Now make me wrong and evidence this:


No, don't just say ok - answer the question. That comes first. Without being able to do so your whole argument collapses. So the following posts...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> No, don't just say ok - answer the question. That comes first. Without being able to do so your whole argument collapses. So the following posts...



I have! And you're talking bollocks!

Your turn to answer. Where did you get this from:




			
				butchersapron said:
			
		

> As it goes, a large part of the 350 million bollocks was about that precise audience watching it live.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 24, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> You got this from my 'dog watching it' remark.
> 
> What happens if someone goes for a piss or to cook dinner halfway through. Are they lumped in as audience too?


BARB goes on market research companies according to the great sage wikipedia



> RSMB are responsible for survey design, quality control and calculation methodology. Ipsos MORI's role is to survey the characteristics of the television owning population, including an element of direct recruitment to the viewing panel. Kantar Media is responsible for establishing and maintaining the new BARB viewing panel. It has a separate contract covering meter panel installation, data retrieval, processing and audience reporting functions


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> I have! And you're talking bollocks!
> 
> Your turn to answer. Where did you get this from:


No you haven't. Or if you did, how did you answer it? How did you establish that the 350 million figure included a whole host of things that you made up?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Did I miss the bit where the 350 million figure was sourced from anywhere btw?



I've traced it to an old issue of _Greenpeace International_ magazine that was trying to debunk the much-quoted factoid that Top Gear has 1.2 billion viewers.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> No you haven't. Or if you did, how did you answer it? How did you establish that the 350 million figure included a whole host of things that you made up?



Read the first line of #928.

Then come back and answer my question and stop wriggling.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Read the first line of #928.
> 
> Then come back and answer my question and stop wriggling.


Saying IMO is wriggling.

You said that 350 million _would _include all sorts of things - when pushed it became _IMO_.  The arguments you then based on that 350 million all fall. Not IMO. In reality. 

IMO ffs. What is your _opinion _worth as regards the collation of broadcast figures?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

_Here's a *fact*. Here is how they do it. This is how they established that FACT._

IMO


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

IMO. Fucking hell.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

binka said:


> it's like the bullshit claim that more than 2 billion people watched the royal wedding
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...7/Royal-wedding-watched-around-the-world.html
> or that a billion people watch the superbowl
> http://www.todayifoundout.com/index...by-anywhere-near-a-billion-people-every-year/



2 billion. 

I admire their restraint for always sticking with numbers lower than the total number of people on the planet, though.  Once someone breaches that it will be a marketing runaway scenario.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2015)




----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> Saying IMO is wriggling.
> 
> You said that 350 million _would _include all sorts of things - when pushed it became _IMO_.  The arguments you then based on that 350 million all fall. Not IMO. In reality.
> 
> IMO ffs. What is your _opinion _worth as regards the collation of broadcast figures?



LOL, you're more slippery than a KY'd eel. 

How about this? I made a mistake. I should have stated that _I reckon _the 350mio includes viewers of repeats and different episodes.

You on the other hand have categorically stated that :



> ... a large part of the 350 million bollocks was about that precise audience watching it live.



Now, source us up!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> LOL, you're more slippery than a KY'd eel.
> 
> How about this? I made a mistake. I should have stated that _I reckon _the 350mio includes viewers of repeats and different episodes.
> 
> ...


So, if none of the stuff you say about the 350 million stands up then why did you present it as fact? You are doing the same authority bullshit that i entered this thread on. 350 mullion is now a figure to be defended. Because it's 350 million.

The idea that top gear's worldwide live audience wasn't part of the last week debate is beyond bizarre.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

750 million.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

8ball said:


> 750 million.


citation needed


----------



## maomao (Mar 24, 2015)

Meh, I've been on a tv show watched by 50 million people (in China). There's a channel there that shows Top Gear. It's on in India too. They could notch up 9 digit viewing figures pretty easily between them. It got cancelled in Russia and replaced with an Italian motor show though. The source for the 350 million figure on Top Gear's wikipedia page is from a puff piece on CBS news. It's almost certainly bollocks.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> The idea that top gear's worldwide live audience wasn't part of the last week debate is beyond bizarre.



Fair enough.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> citation needed



Clicky clicky.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

is quibbling about viewing figures a good use of everyone's time?

we could alway quibble endlessly about the validity of online petitions - there are 1, 031, 650 signatories on change.org petitioning for Jeremy Clarkson to be reinstated, under the slogan 'freedom to fracas'.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> is quibbling about viewing figures a good use of everyone's time?



Who gives a fuck, it's U75.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> is quibbling about viewing figures a good use of everyone's time?
> 
> we could alway quibble endlessly about the validity of online petitions - there are 1, 031, 650 signatories on change.org petitioning for Jeremy Clarkson to be reinstated, under the slogan 'freedom to fracas'.



Class War could pick up some tips on sloganeering from these people.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2015)

8ball said:


> Class War could pick up some tips on sloganeering from these people.



Maybe Class War could go round Jezza's & stove his head in with a Ferrari Dino piston?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> is quibbling about viewing figures a good use of everyone's time?
> 
> we could alway quibble endlessly about the validity of online petitions - there are 1, 031, 650 signatories on change.org petitioning for Jeremy Clarkson to be reinstated, under the slogan 'freedom to fracas'.


350 million is a weapon they wield - take it apart and they haven't got it anymore.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Mar 24, 2015)

8ball said:


> 750 million.



"Also the worlds second most expensive show at £1.2 billion"


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> "Also the worlds second most expensive show at £1.2 billion"



And we get it for free.  <salutes BBC>


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Mar 24, 2015)

Although the biggest bit of bollocks from that site is this gem...

Columnist A. A. Gill described the show as, "a triumph of the craft of programme-making, of the minute, obsessive, musical masonry of editing, the french polishing of colourwashing and grading."

Need to send that to private eye for the "order of the brown nose" section. Could do with all the spare tenners I can get.


----------



## souljacker (Mar 24, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> just explaining why i think it's not just about racist presenters.



No, it isn't and I'm certain Top Gear will return, minus it's racist presenter and his pet but hopefully May will survive. 

I like cars and engines and Top Gear still has enough of that to keep me interested so I can ignore the infantile bollocks. The world would be a better place if Clarkson was sacked and they got Tiff Needell back in my opinion.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

8ball said:


> Clicky clicky.


No, on the Top Gear wiki. One beeeelion viewers.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> So, if none of the stuff you say about the 350 million stands up then why did you present it as fact? You are doing the same authority bullshit that i entered this thread on. 350 mullion is now a figure to be defended. Because it's 350 million.
> 
> The idea that top gear's worldwide live audience wasn't part of the last week debate is beyond bizarre.



Who gives a shit? Really?

A _fuckton_ of people (internationally) "watch" Top Gear. That doesn't mean all on the first/live viewing, every week, though probably some reasonably accepted standard of counting number of people that would recognise JC (Clarkson) and have probably seen a few episodes at some point in their life (much in the same instance that I would say I 'watch' HIGNFY). I don't think anyone took it literally as the equivalent to the, for example, 20m* that tuned in (that Xmas day) to see Den serve Angie their divorce papers...

And tbh I assumed the 350mil does sound plausible (on the above basis) - even if it is a whoppingly ridiculous shot in the dark. There are international versions of it, and from memory the BBC news website has a Top Gear/Motoring section that's equal in stature to their Sports and Weather headers..Though to be any kind of authority on the number would devoting little grey cells to something I really couldn't give a shit about nor provide any kind of intelligence even after a long and dodgily sourced search for pieces on global viewing populations - I suspect most people feel the same, surely?

I get someone's got to fight the good fight, and it's a good job they didn't _get away_ with over-estimating the global Top Gear viewing population. But really, isn't there a better use of everyone's time?!

(and yep, I can't wait to see the dickhead off our screens either)

*I'm sure 20m was the quoted figure, though happy to accept it's bollocks. Don't start...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Ted Striker said:


> Who gives a shit? Really?
> 
> A _fuckton_ of people (internationally) "watch" Top Gear. That doesn't mean all on the first/live viewing, every week, though probably some reasonably accepted standard of counting number of people that would recognise JC (Clarkson) and have probably seen a few episodes at some point in their life (much in the same instance that I would say I 'watch' HIGNFY). I don't think anyone took it literally as the equivalent to the, for example, 20m* that tuned in (that Xmas day) to see Den serve Angie their divorce papers...
> 
> ...


All them words for that opening question?


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 24, 2015)

Exactly


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Ted Striker said:


> Exactly


Let them _make weapons_ against us. To challenge is _boring_.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

Oh yeah, and so time and resource consuming. I literally can't do anything else ever now i've posted on this thread. Cheers for sorting me out ted. I almost wasted my life doing things that you wouldn't do yourself  there.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

But in less words.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

I assume a thing is true though I haven't looked at it at all, why is anyone wasting their time looking at it?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> Columnist A. A. Gill described the show as, "a triumph of the craft of programme-making, of the minute, obsessive, musical masonry of editing, the french polishing of colourwashing and grading."



Clearly hoping for a go in the Reasonably Priced Car.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2015)

Telegraph says he's getting the sack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11493270/Jeremy-Clarkson-to-be-sacked-by-the-BBC.html


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Telegraph says he's getting the sack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11493270/Jeremy-Clarkson-to-be-sacked-by-the-BBC.html



What does the Daily Mail say?


----------



## agricola (Mar 24, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Telegraph says he's getting the sack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11493270/Jeremy-Clarkson-to-be-sacked-by-the-BBC.html



They are silent on Peter Oborne being his replacement, though


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2015)

What an MP boss wanker:



> Clarkson, who has a seven figure contract with the BBC, was suspended on March 10 *after reporting himself to his bosses over the incident*.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 24, 2015)

agricola said:


> They are silent on Peter Oborne being his replacement, though



I want to see Peter Oborne blow open the whole 'unscripted' conspiracy live on air.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> What an MP boss wanker:


A boss AND a grass


----------



## weltweit (Mar 24, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Telegraph says he's getting the sack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11493270/Jeremy-Clarkson-to-be-sacked-by-the-BBC.html


I expect Clarkson will get the sack but I am not sure about Chris Evans replacing him. I didn't really take to Evans in his previous incarnations. Will be interesting to see if Hammond and May stay on or not.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 24, 2015)

They could get a series worth of material just from Evans's garage


----------



## cutandsplice (Mar 24, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I expect Clarkson will get the sack but I am not sure about Chris Evans replacing him. I didn't really take to Evans in his previous incarnations. Will be interesting to see if Hammond and May stay on or not.


No it won't.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 24, 2015)

cutandsplice said:


> No it won't.


It will be interesting to me.


----------



## keybored (Mar 24, 2015)

weltweit said:


> It will be interesting to me.


See #974


----------



## Favelado (Mar 24, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I expect Clarkson will get the sack but I am not sure about Chris Evans replacing him. I didn't really take to Evans in his previous incarnations. Will be interesting to see if Hammond and May stay on or not.



Evans is a complete cunt who pisses me off and likes fast cars. Perfect for the job. He won't take it because I think he'll realise that you don't want to deal with the constant comparisons with Clarkson and the overall risk of it all going tits up.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)

friedaweed said:


> One less Tory sprog to feed when she goes the way of Bobby Sands then


Let's hope she can convince her pater to join her.


----------



## marty21 (Mar 25, 2015)

Idea for TV show , the million people who signed the Clarkson petition , Clarkson , one island , one car


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 25, 2015)

Roadkill said:


> I can't speak for anyone else, but I enjoy _Top Gear_ and I'll be sorry if this is the end of it.  I don't like Clarkson's views and I don't like some of the humour, but I do enjoy watching them rag around in supercars I'll only ever be able to dream about, and I do like the arsing about with turning cars into boats and caravans into airships, doing ridiculously hard drives in ridiculously inappropriate/elderly cars, and so on.  I don't see anything wrong with that, and tbh I take offence at being labelled a 'prick' because of it.



I stopped watching it regularly after _the slope on the bridge_.

Like you I enjoyed the supercars and some of the pissing about, but for years the scripted banter between "the boys" has got regressively dreadful, as have Clarkson's antics. I'm up for a bit of teenage humour every now and then but these twats have been in the nursery for the last few years, and I know that you'll agree that constantly denigrating foreigners _just isn't amusing_. The US and Mexico specials were fucking moronic and the BBC's insistence that the Porsche escapade in Argentina wasn't engineered is insulting.

I want Clarkson sacked (and Hammond, but that's just because he gets on my tits) and the show to continue in a revised, (ever so slightly) more grown up format.

I don't know if that's possible to do and maintain the ratings but if it's not and it eventually disappears, I'll live with it. I'm a petrolhead, but for me the balance between irreverently enjoyable auto-mayhem and cringeworthy comments and production, has well and truly tipped to the latter.

And that's without Clarkson assaulting people.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 25, 2015)

I'm not sure that refusing your Farley's Rusks in a strop one teatime counts as a hunger strike.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

two sheds said:


> I'm not sure that refusing your Farley's Rusks in a strop one teatime counts as a hunger strike.


farley's? some people don't know when they're well off.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 25, 2015)

sacked, apparently.


----------



## souljacker (Mar 25, 2015)

5/2 to be sky's new f1 pundit according to betfair


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 25, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> ... the whole show promotes and glamourises performance cars without regard to their environmental impact and contribution to materialism. i don't think cars should be regarded these days as anything more than a dreadful necessity. I work in a boys' school and they all want performance cars when they grow up, partly due to watching programmes such as Top Gear. I don't think this should be encouraged for both environmental reasons and anti-materialist reasons. many people still seem to be 'glamoured' by nice cars, despite their political and environmental credentials and i think this is a shame.



Oh stick it up your tailpipe, ya sanctimonious plank.

You make me want to wheelspin through a field of wheatgrass.


----------



## Cid (Mar 25, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> 350 million is a weapon they wield - take it apart and they haven't got it anymore.



To clarify when I used it I was responding to OU's fears of rivers of Clarkson's. i.e as a proportion of 350m, 1m on the change petition is not a huge amount. On reflection I'm happy to ditch that and use the UK viewing figures, which would indicate that at most 1/5th of Top Gear viewers are the kind of twat who'd put their name to that petition. Plus at least one who balked at putting his name to it, should only stick by your mates when there's still a chance of them winning after all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 25, 2015)

Cid said:


> should only stick by your mates when there's still a chance of them winning after all.


I'm struggling to think of a context where I'd agree with that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 25, 2015)

Dan U said:


> sacked, apparently.


Correct result.

And the people who signed the petition can watch the programme (if it is still made) with the new presenter/new format. Or not watch it. 

Like grown ups.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

tbh any man who would appear in public in that sort of shirt deserves the sack


----------



## The Boy (Mar 25, 2015)

Hard to assess his shorts from the pic.  Dreadful shirt though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

The Boy said:


> Hard to assess his shorts from the pic.  Dreadful shirt though.


it was a fucking typo


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

Dan U said:


> sacked, apparently.


unclear according to this news search from a moment ago


----------



## Dan U (Mar 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> unclear according to this news search from a moment ago
> 
> View attachment 69228



teach me to look at the Guardian


----------



## Cid (Mar 25, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm struggling to think of a context where I'd agree with that.



I mean Cameron probably didn't sign the petition (for that reason).


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 25, 2015)

Cid said:


> I mean Cameron probably didn't sign the petition (for that reason).


Too cryptic for me today.


----------



## The Boy (Mar 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it was a fucking typo



Typo better then


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

The Boy said:


> Typo better then


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 25, 2015)

He's gone, they have just announced it on the news.


----------



## StoneRoad (Mar 25, 2015)

Good, perhaps the bullying git will understand how others feel when out of a job. (Not that he'll actually suffer the sort of stuff the rest of us have to deal with when unemployed).


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)

Brendan O'Neill gets it so badly wrong (as usual).

First, there's the title


> The dogmatic liberal elite have finally kicked out Jeremy Clarkson. I hope they're happy



Then there's this


> Just as *you or I would be sacked if we walloped a co-worker*, especially someone below us in the pecking order, so Clarkson deserves the boot too, says his army of haters in the media and on Twitter.
> 
> Please. If this were a simple punishment-for-physicality issue, why has so much of the Clarkson-baiting commentary obsessed over what Clarkson thinks and says?



He's twisting...


> The focus hasn’t been on *what he allegedly did with his fists in that hotel*, but on what he does with his brain and his mouth the rest of the time: agitate the PC; annoy the eco-friendly; spout values that We — as in that infinitesimally small number of people who work in politics and the media — consider to be toxic and wicked.



Say what? Then he produces this.


> Witness how seamlessly *all the “Sack Clarkson” commentary *moved between saying “You can’t punch your work colleagues" (which is true) to slamming Clarkson for his *“xenophobic remarks"* (that is, his off-colour jokes) and for "pushing the boundaries of… political correctness”.


Then finally, he tells us


> I won't miss Clarkson on Top Gear, because I didn’t watch him on it. But millions and millions of people, here and abroad, will miss him. And all of us, Clarkson fans or not, should be worried that the BBC has finally been completely colonised by the dead, dogmatic, fun-free outlook of a minuscule, if hugely influential, section of British society.



O'Neill is seriously fucked in the head. Won't someone please put him out of his misery?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...out-Jeremy-Clarkson.-I-hope-theyre-happy.html


----------



## susie12 (Mar 25, 2015)

Good.  Always the chance he may slime back in, they have form for that, cf Kenny Everett, Angus Deayton, Chris Evans.  Though maybe Clarkson will go to Sky.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 25, 2015)

Awww. I hoped they would keep him on then tomorrow I could flatten a manager and use Clarkson as precedent.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 25, 2015)

The King is dead. Long live the King (whoever that be).


----------



## belboid (Mar 25, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Brendan O'Neill gets it so badly wrong (as usual).


that's his job, same as Clarkson's is to be a complete cunt


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 25, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> O'Neill is seriously fucked in the head. Won't someone please put him out of his misery?
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...out-Jeremy-Clarkson.-I-hope-theyre-happy.html


That almost reads like a spoof. 

And it's a tired old lie now that loads of people hate Clarkson because they're anti-car.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That almost reads like a spoof.
> 
> And it's a tired old lie now that loads of people hate Clarkson because they're anti-car.


I think we can both agree that O'Neill is a self-parody.


----------



## Zabo (Mar 25, 2015)

I think I'll have a cup of tea to celebrate.

Not looking good for the Chipping Norton set is it? Rebekah Brooks, Clarkson and just the slimey bastard to go in a few weeks time.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 25, 2015)

The lefties have banned Top Gear.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)




----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 25, 2015)

*The sound of 350,000,000 (pairs of) tears*


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)

The sales of Levi 501s are set to fall.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 25, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> The sales of Levi 501s are set to fall.


Or perhaps rise, if you think about it.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2015)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Or perhaps rise, if you think about it.


True. They fell while he was wearing them.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 25, 2015)

Cowboy-boot-cunts everywhere have a ukip-moan. Go on.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 25, 2015)

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/investigation-summary.pdf


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 25, 2015)

marty21 said:


> Idea for TV show , the million people who signed the Clarkson petition , Clarkson , one island , one car


Yeah use an island with no scran on too. The Hunger Strike games


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

The 350M audience is 'estimated' again in this article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32052736


----------



## Supine (Mar 25, 2015)

Doing a Clarkson is certainly a memorable way to leave a job.


----------



## tommers (Mar 25, 2015)

Top Gear is wanker's telly.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 25, 2015)

tommers said:


> Top Gear is wanker's telly.


*slow handclap*


----------



## Cid (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The 350M audience is 'estimated' again in this article
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32052736



Not a word on racism in there.


----------



## peterkro (Mar 25, 2015)

I'm thinking there's probably a Clarksons gone party in trafalgar sq. tonight.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 25, 2015)

Clarkson is a smart bloke who knwos he has been a twat, his ego will be hurt, but thats about it. pfft

What worries me is Hammond- how will he survive without his big protective mate ?

I think he should be put down immediately to spare him any further distress and to stop the annoying fuck from appearing elsewhere on teh tellybox


----------



## weltweit (Mar 25, 2015)

Clarkson could face police probe
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-...e-police-probe-after-he-is-sacked-by-the-bbc/


----------



## T & P (Mar 25, 2015)

He should face a police probe. Any of us would, and would likely be prosecuted for assault, if we punched a co-worker in the face.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 25, 2015)

*Downing Street statement*
Posted at 16:05

Responding to the Clarkson decision, Downing Street said that Prime Minister David Cameron believed that "if you do something wrong at work there can be consequences" and that "aggressive and abusive behaviour is not acceptable in the workplace".


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Mar 25, 2015)

So Nancy Cameron will starve to death. I wonder how that will play with voters?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 25, 2015)

Will start paying my licence fee now.


----------



## tommers (Mar 25, 2015)

B0B2oo9 said:


> *Downing Street statement*
> Posted at 16:05
> 
> Responding to the Clarkson decision, Downing Street said that Prime Minister David Cameron believed that "if you do something wrong at work there can be consequences" and that "aggressive and abusive behaviour is not acceptable in the workplace".



Is that real?

Fuck, it fucking is.  Jesus fucking wept.  What kind of cunting world do we live in?


----------



## belboid (Mar 25, 2015)




----------



## Belushi (Mar 25, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Clarkson could face police probe
> http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-03-25/clarkson-could-face-police-probe-after-he-is-sacked-by-the-bbc/



Good, he drew blood. This is a really nasty case of workplace bullying.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 25, 2015)

You have to admire the Cheddar Gorge newspaper for getting in their local angle on a national story.


----------



## T & P (Mar 25, 2015)

Can we change the thread title now please?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

This won't harm Clarkson at all. There'll be rival stations waving cheque books at him regardless of the fact he's an abusive cunt and there'll be no further action / a caution from the old bill.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 25, 2015)

belboid said:


>



From the full Cheddar Valley Gazette article http://www.cheddarvalleygazette.co....-aftyer-Gear/story-26230188-detail/story.html

the last line is 





> Clarkson is not believed to have been there for the filming.


----------



## marty21 (Mar 25, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> The sales of Levi 501s are set to fall.


 I've worn them through the dark years of Clarkson


----------



## marty21 (Mar 25, 2015)

I used to like Top Gear tbf,  but then it became all about Clarkson so I stopped. Will watch it when they replace him with a proper lead presenter.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 25, 2015)

sleaterkinney said:


> The lefties have banned Top Gear.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 25, 2015)

This is a pisstake, isn't it?


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

#bringbackfeudalism


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 25, 2015)

not-bono-ever said:


> Clarkson is a smart bloke who knwos he has been a twat, his ego will be hurt, but thats about it. pfft
> 
> What worries me is Hammond- how will he survive without his big protective mate x


It will be like that episode of grange hill where gripper was suspended, and his henchmen turned out to be quite nice for a bit. Then gripper came back and he went back to his normal role as a twat.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 25, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Good, he drew blood. This is a really nasty case of workplace bullying.


Here's hoping the twat is convicted and sent down. A nice spell in Belmarsh would be a good outcome. 

Or perhaps a prisoner swap with Argentina.


----------



## belboid (Mar 25, 2015)

Have we noted yet that the man who committed a racially motivated assault _hasn't _actually been sacked?

He's just not getting his contract (due up in 6 days) renewed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 25, 2015)

B0B2oo9 said:


> Responding to the Clarkson decision, Downing Street said that Prime Minister David Cameron believed that "if you do something wrong at work there can be consequences"



Unless you're the prime minister, in which case you can't even be held responsible when your government's policies result in numerous preventable deaths


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 25, 2015)

belboid said:


> Have we noted yet that the man who committed a racially motivated assault _hasn't _actually been sacked?
> 
> He's just not getting his contract (due up in 6 days) renewed.



"racially aggravated" rather than "racially motivated"?


----------



## belboid (Mar 25, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> "racially aggravated" rather than "racially motivated"?


fair point


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 25, 2015)

Was that a clap of thunder I heard or just the gasp of relief from 200,000 HR managers across the land?


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> This won't harm Clarkson at all. There'll be rival stations waving cheque books at him regardless of the fact he's an abusive cunt and there'll be no further action / a caution from the old bill.



Independent has reported that Sky, ITV and Channel Four have all said they're not interested. (Although, imo, that could change once it's perceived that it's blown over).

There's also a suggestion from supporters about Netflix doing something. Their comment in response was more non committal than an outright no.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

paolo said:


> Independent has reported that Sky, ITV and Channel Four have all said they're not interested. (Although, imo, that could change once it's perceived that it's blown over).
> 
> There's also a suggestion from supporters about Netflix doing something. Their comment in response was more non committal than an outright no.



Maybe he's toxic now. He certainly is _right_ now. His profile has gone up though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

Just remembered that anecdote about Jeremy Clarkson meeting Kate Moss at a celeb shindig. She didn't recognise him. He said, 'I do Top Gear', so she asked him for a couple of grammes of coke. Perhaps that's a career he could fall back on, if hard times are ahead of him.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> The 350M audience is 'estimated' again in this article
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32052736



You know, with this audience figures stuff, I've never actually seen anyone going round individually counting the audience.
I watched a Dr Who Christmas special once and they were going on about their viewing figures but no one came round my place and the curtains were shut.  It's all a swiz.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Spymaster said:


> Oh stick it up your tailpipe, ya sanctimonious plank.
> 
> You make me want to wheelspin through a field of wheatgrass.





Though I can see where OU is coming from tbf.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Maybe he's toxic now. He certainly is _right_ now. His profile has gone up though.


I hear there is a vacancy at One Direction !


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> You know, with this audience figures stuff, I've never actually seen anyone going round individually counting the audience.
> I watched a Dr Who Christmas special once and they were going on about their viewing figures but no one came round my place and the curtains were shut.  It's all a swiz.



 they have some way of measuring it but I don't know how.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> You know, with this audience figures stuff, I've never actually seen anyone going round individually counting the audience.
> I watched a Dr Who Christmas special once and they were going on about their viewing figures but no one came round my place and the curtains were shut.  It's all a swiz.


 I'm sure you know how BARB calculate viewing figures. Not sure how they do it on computers, mind.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I'm sure you know how BARB calculate viewing figures. Not sure how they do it on computers, mind.



I believe it's something to do with how many power stations you need to switch on for people's kettles in the ad breaks.
BUT TOP GEAR HAS NO AD BREAKS!!!


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Maybe he's toxic now. He certainly is _right_ now.



Yep, I think that's the nub of it.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Nah, he'll walk straight into another media job if he fancies it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> I believe it's something to do with how many power stations you need to switch on for people's kettles in the ad breaks.
> BUT TOP GEAR HAS NO AD BREAKS!!!


no, some households (deemed to be a representative amount) have a monitoring device, that's all. they may not even need a physical device anymore, but it used to be a little box stuck on the telly.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 25, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> I'm sure you know how BARB calculate viewing figures. Not sure how they do it on computers, mind.



The Butchers Apron Reporting Bureau?!


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> Nah, he'll walk straight into another media job if he fancies it.



Needs someone to hire him. Most of the major UK broadcasters are saying no. (At the moment).


----------



## belboid (Mar 25, 2015)

Considering it IS shown in 170 countries, it seems quite plausible that it has been viewed by 350 million people, at some point. As a regular viewing figure, rather more dubious


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

Ted Striker said:


> The Butchers Apron Reporting Bureau?!


 Broadcast Audience Research Board: http://www.barb.co.uk/


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 25, 2015)

paolo said:


> Most of the major UK broadcasters are saying no


In public.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

Well Murdoch is in support so presumably his column in The Sun is safe. This is what sticks in the craw. Not only the fact he's got enough cash not to suffer but he has multiple well paying 'jobs'.


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

Worth noting that quite a few countries have their own licensed version. USA, France, Germany...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> no, some households (deemed to be a representative amount) have a monitoring device, that's all. they may not even need a physical device anymore, but it used to be a little box stuck on the telly.



Hang on - what if all the _other countries_ showing Top Gear also had something like BARB, and what if someone from the BBC got these figures and put them into a spreadsheet...

Nope, thought I'd had an idea but it's gone - come on boffins, let's sort out this '350 million' shizzle!!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> In public.


http://www.theguardian.com/business...-boost-if-clarkson-joins-from-bbc-says-broker


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Well Murdoch is in support so presumably his column in The Sun is safe. This is what sticks in the craw. Not only the fact he's got enough cash not to suffer but he has multiple well paying 'jobs'.



The newspaper columns will be "small money" compared with Top Gear, I'd reckon.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 25, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/business...-boost-if-clarkson-joins-from-bbc-says-broker


Quite. The morals of what he's done will go out the window as soon as the cheques roll in.


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

paolo said:


> The newspaper columns will be "small money" compared with Top Gear, I'd reckon.



Undoubtedly. But the common man fucks up over far less and he has fuck all to fall back on. Perhaps even homelessness to look forward to if he has a mortgage. And I bet Clarkson's column pays more than the average wage.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 25, 2015)

paolo said:


> The newspaper columns will be "small money" compared with Top Gear, I'd reckon.



Bet you he gets a 100k a year for his Sun column. And that's, what, an hours work a week?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Bet you he gets a 100k a year for his Sun column. And that's, what, an hours work a week?



I'd spend 3 or 4 hours on it for that.  I'd probably spellcheck it too.


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> In public.



True.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Undoubtedly. But the common man fucks up over far less and he has fuck all to fall back on. Perhaps even homelessness to look forward to if he has a mortgage. And I bet Clarkson's column pays more than the average wage.


yeh but it contains less literary value than one of michael winner's restaurant reviews, which is saying something.


----------



## paolo (Mar 25, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Bet you he gets a 100k a year for his Sun column. And that's, what, an hours work a week?



Indeed, but the point still stands that being fired from TG will make a big dent in his earnings.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> You know, with this audience figures stuff, I've never actually seen anyone going round individually counting the audience.
> I watched a Dr Who Christmas special once and they were going on about their viewing figures but no one came round my place and the curtains were shut.  It's all a swiz.


why were the curtains shut at yours? what sordid misdeeds were you up to?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> why were the curtains shut at yours? what sordid misdeeds were you up to?



You're obviously one of those people like my mother who thinks curtains have to be open all the time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

8ball said:


> You're obviously one of those people like my mother who thinks curtains have to be open all the time.


only when the audience counters are peeking about.


----------



## Schmetterling (Mar 25, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> they have some way of measuring it but I don't know how.


Same vans that the TV Licensing Authority uses???


----------



## maomao (Mar 25, 2015)

paolo said:


> Indeed, but the point still stands that being fired from TG will make a big dent in his earnings.


Doubt it. His presenter's salary is just under a mil (and taxed) but he's taken nearly 19 million in dividends and buyout from part owning the production company that makes TG so he's probably barely noticed. And if he can't get a mil off Sky or ITV to present some piece of shit that takes half the effort making TG did then he's not trying. If he doesn't do another show it will be because in fact the private media wouldn't stand for most of his shit and he wouldn't get away with it when there's lawyers whose job is to protect the bottom line going over his scripts.

The BBC investigation has made it very clear that he is an absolute cunt and a bully and it would be lovely if he did get his comeuppance but being sacked from Top Gear isn't it. The prick needs a good hiding.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 25, 2015)

We'll probably see him in ads all over the fucking place


----------



## laptop (Mar 25, 2015)

two sheds said:


> We'll probably see him in ads all over the fucking place



/DISLIKE


----------



## Citizen66 (Mar 25, 2015)

Schmetterling said:


> Same vans that the TV Licensing Authority uses???



And maybe the same people. 

The tight bastards


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 25, 2015)

Schmetterling said:


> Same vans that the TV Licensing Authority uses???


no


----------



## T & P (Mar 25, 2015)

If the BBC has no editorial control of Top Gear USA I guess it'd be powerless to stop them from signing up Clarkson... He loves the place anyway. I remember coming across an article he wrote for a newspaper (or it could have been a series of tweets) in which he went into full 'this country has gone to the dogs and I'm tempted to move to America' mode.

I'm also curious about Clarkson's regular appearances on QI and HIGNFY. Will the Beeb tell the producers of those shows not to have him on anymore?

I hope James May does continue to do programmes for the BBC. I don't think he's a bad apple at heart, and some of his 'vintage toy' programmes have been ace. Hammond on the other hand can fuck right off to Sky.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 25, 2015)

T & P said:


> I'm also curious about Clarkson's regular appearances on QI and HIGNFY.



He's scheduled to host HIGNFY next month.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 25, 2015)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> He's scheduled to host HIGNFY next month.


that'll be worth watching


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 25, 2015)

T & P said:


> 'this country has gone to the dogs and I'm tempted to move to America' mode.



if that's what he thinks







seriously,  at some people (and i don't mean on here as i've not bothered to read the thread but if the cap fits...) who i'd thought were reasonably progressive in outlook coming to his defence.

why the fuck are they supporting such a cunt?  a homophobic, racist, sexist, disabled-ist cunt, with a public school sense of entitlement so big he thinks thumping someone is a reasonable reaction to not getting his own way?  a cunt who encourages violence to transport workers?  a cunt who's mates with call me dave?  a cunt who thinks he's being 'brave' for carrying on like an overgrown playground bully?

i really don't get it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 25, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> that'll be worth watching


could rival the classic one with deaton after he'd been rumbled with chang and sex workers


----------



## T & P (Mar 25, 2015)

Puddy_Tat said:


> if that's what he thinks
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here's the piece in question. Even for his standards, a particularly thorough effort in vileness

http://www.charltonlife.com/discuss...ksons-sunday-times-article-on-peter-mandelson

A small quote from it



> There’s talk of emigration in the air. It’s everywhere I go. Parties. Work. In the supermarket. My daughter is working herself half to death to get good grades at GSCE and can’t see the point because she won’t be going to university, because she doesn’t have a beak or flippers or a qualification in washing windscreens at the lights. She wonders, often, why we don’t live in America.


----------



## ringo (Mar 26, 2015)

Saw over someone's shoulder on the train that the Sun is carrying an article telling how poor victim Clarkson is feeling "hurt and upset" by his ordeal


----------



## magneze (Mar 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> that'll be worth watching


It won't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2015)

magneze said:


> It won't.


i will give your opinion the weight it deserves.


----------



## magneze (Mar 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i will give your opinion the weight it deserves.


I would expect nothing less.


----------



## Limejuice (Mar 26, 2015)

ringo said:


> Saw over someone's shoulder on the train that the Sun is carrying an article telling how poor victim Clarkson is feeling "hurt and upset" by his ordeal


Doesn't Jeremy have a column in the Sun?

Did he write the article?


----------



## ringo (Mar 26, 2015)

Limejuice said:


> Doesn't Jeremy have a column in the Sun?
> 
> Did he write the article?



I don't think this was his column, this was "news".


----------



## Ax^ (Mar 26, 2015)

In the sun


----------



## belboid (Mar 31, 2015)

The 'Not Top Gear Tour' is going ahead, with all three of them - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32137424


----------



## Interloper (Mar 31, 2015)

So I'm late to the buffet but seems odd to cover up paedos but not a twat punching another twat.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 31, 2015)

Seems a bit dodgy, I suppose the BBC don't want to compensate all those who bought tickets in advance but it is a bit fishy if you ask me.


----------



## gosub (Mar 31, 2015)

T & P said:


> Here's the piece in question. Even for his standards, a particularly thorough effort in vileness
> 
> http://www.charltonlife.com/discuss...ksons-sunday-times-article-on-peter-mandelson
> 
> A small quote from it



 And, as I keep explaining to my daughter, we can’t go to America because if you catch a cold over there, the health system is designed in such a way that you end up without a house. Or dead.


----------



## Cid (Mar 31, 2015)

belboid said:


> The 'Not Top Gear Tour' is going ahead, with all three of them - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32137424



It's probably less "so as to not disappoint fans" and more "so as not to be sued for contractual damages".


----------



## gosub (Mar 31, 2015)

Cid said:


> It's probably less "so as to not disappoint fans" and more "so as not to be sued for contractual damages".


Did wonder how that would pan out as the TV production isn't the same company as the live, and probably doesn't employ the producer.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 31, 2015)

BBC have taken their branding and the Top Gear name off the live show, suggesting it is being put on by an independent production company who was paying the beeb for use of the name.


----------



## Ponyutd (Apr 8, 2015)

The BBC have announced Jeremy Clarkson will host Have I Got News For You on the 24th of April.
That is all.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Apr 8, 2015)

well that lasted long....


----------



## The Boy (Apr 8, 2015)

Obviously a left-wing conspiracy.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 8, 2015)

It's down to Hat Trick Productions this really rather than the BBC - and they have him booked to host three of the shows.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 8, 2015)

Perhaps also of interest, Yorkshire police have said no action will be taken about the fracas incident.


----------



## T & P (Apr 8, 2015)

BBC has said it had never banned or intended to ban Clarkson from working in/ for the BBC- it simply terminated the Top Gear contract.

I'll be interesting to see what flak he gets from Merton and Hislop. Though sadly I suspect it won't be that much.


----------



## belboid (Apr 8, 2015)

Expect deliveries of hot steak, and dreadfully witty remarks about hitting the producer.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 8, 2015)

Did I dream it, or did Clarkson draw blood from Hislop on HIGNFY some years ago?


----------



## DrRingDing (Apr 8, 2015)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did I dream it, or did Clarkson draw blood from Hislop on HIGNFY some years ago?



He did. Hislop brought it after the 'fracas'.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 8, 2015)

What? Clarkson hit Hislop?


----------



## DrRingDing (Apr 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> What? Clarkson hit Hislop?



With a pen.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 8, 2015)

DrRingDing said:


> With a pen.


It's mightier than the sword.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 8, 2015)

he hit Piers Morgan too.


----------



## BandWagon (Apr 8, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> he hit Piers Morgan too.


He gets credits for that. Not as well as Brett Lee though:


----------



## 19sixtysix (Apr 8, 2015)

butchersapron said:


> It's down to Hat Trick Productions this really rather than the BBC - and they have him booked to host three of the shows.



It is down to the editor in chief at the BBC, the director general, what is broadcast. That is where the buck stops and if he allows this he has no credibility. Clarkson's re-appearence is a fuck you to the staff and makes recent pronouncements on respect at work a preverbal pile of shite.


----------



## gosub (Apr 9, 2015)

19sixtysix said:


> It is down to the editor in chief at the BBC, the director general, what is broadcast. That is where the buck stops and if he allows this he has no credibility. Clarkson's re-appearence is a fuck you to the staff and makes recent pronouncements on respect at work a preverbal pile of shite.



Topgear was a BBC production, and as an employer they were right not renew his contract.  HIGNFY is not a BBC production, and as such has some freedom. Or you advocating blacklists?A fuck you and fuck anybody who dares employ you type approach.


----------



## gosub (Apr 9, 2015)

http://order-order.com/2015/04/09/clarkson-pulls-out-of-have-i-got-news-for-you/#_@/FULj2VuG8dFk8A


----------



## T & P (Apr 9, 2015)

Christ, the comments on that blog are (unsurprisingly perhaps) as vile as they can possibly get.


----------



## xenon (Apr 9, 2015)

Orang Utan said:


> he hit Piers Morgan too.


Stopped clock etc.


----------



## xenon (Apr 9, 2015)

gosub said:


> Topgear was a BBC production, and as an employer they were right not renew his contract.  HIGNFY is not a BBC production, and as such has some freedom. Or you advocating blacklists?A fuck you and fuck anybody who dares employ you type approach.


 Not quite the same is it.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 9, 2015)

BandWagon said:


> He gets credits for that. Not as well as Brett Lee though:




Got to give Piss some credit for having the balls to go in there knowing full well that he can't bat for shit.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 9, 2015)

danny la rouge said:


> It's mightier than the sword.



Don't bring a sword to a pen fight.


----------



## laptop (Apr 10, 2015)

8ball said:


> Don't bring a sword to a pen fight.



But especially not the converse.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Apr 10, 2015)

gosub said:


> Topgear was a BBC production, and as an employer they were right not renew his contract.  HIGNFY is not a BBC production, and as such has some freedom. Or you advocating blacklists?A fuck you and fuck anybody who dares employ you type approach.



Clarkson hit a producer on BBC business. If I hit a producer in the course of my business I'd expect to be sacked and not re-employed a few days later. Just cause HIGNFY is an external contractor I don't expect to see him working (even indirectly) for the BBC for sometime.


----------



## gosub (Apr 11, 2015)

fuck lists of who sub contractors can and cant employ


----------



## 19sixtysix (Apr 11, 2015)

Sub contractors can employ who the fuck they like but they shouldn't expect get in the building to conduct violence, thieving, bullying etc and in the case of the BBC get on air.


----------



## Looby (Apr 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> fuck lists of who sub contractors can and cant employ


Contractors hire people, sub contractors are hired. If a sub contractor hires someone, they become a contractor. 

When I worked for a mortgage broker, we had a bloke from one of our lenders working out of our office. He wasn't an employee of my company. 

He got pissed at the christmas party, made a pass at a colleague and then head butted her boyfriend when he told him to back off.
My employer couldn't sack him but they could request that he not come back to the office out of respect to the woman he groped and because he was a violent cunt. My employer didn't want his staff to feel uncomfortable or intimated. It seems that's how BBC staff felt about Clarkson because most of them fucked off to bed in case he kicked off apparently.

I don't think Clarkson should be welcomed back so soon on a fairly high profile BBC show after the way he behaved.


----------



## gosub (Apr 11, 2015)

Wow all mortgages are sorted in one big offices.   He


sparklefish said:


> Contractors hire people, sub contractors are hired. If a sub contractor hires someone, they become a contractor.
> 
> When I worked for a mortgage broker, we had a bloke from one of our lenders working out of our office. He wasn't an employee of my company.
> 
> ...


As similarly arseholey behaviour goes its a match. But you aren't saying he never got a job in another branch


----------



## Looby (Apr 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> Wow all mortgages are sorted in one big offices.   He
> 
> As similarly arseholey behaviour goes its a match. But you aren't saying he never got a job in another branch



We only had one branch, he went back to his own head office where he was put on a final warning for his behaviour. If we'd had 10 branches, I still don't think he'd be welcome. The difference is, Clarkson was already on a warning.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2015)

gosub said:


> Wow all mortgages are sorted in one big offices.   He
> 
> As similarly arseholey behaviour goes its a match. But you aren't saying he never got a job in another branch


Wouldn't things be simpler if Clarkson got kicked to death?


----------



## Lo Siento. (Apr 11, 2015)

T & P said:


> Christ, the comments on that blog are (unsurprisingly perhaps) as vile as they can possibly get.


Par for the course on that particular website.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

Jeremy Clarkson pens a new unhinged call for violence against Markle for the Sun​






I thought this was a piss take but apparently not. Then I thought it was because she'd rejected his advances but that's Morgan. What a nasty fucking sorded place the inside of his head is. Ideal writer for the Sun.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 18, 2022)

If you're sharing an article from The Sun on Urban75 then it obviously worked and he did his job well.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

Well if his job is to make himself and the Sun look like unhinged cunts then I'm happy to oblige .


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2022)

The alarming bit is how he doesn't realise that his deeply weird sexualised fantasies of abusing and humiliating women _are not OK to share in a national newspaper._

Reminds me a bit of Liam Neeson's revelation about roaming the streets looking for black people to murder. We know there are people who think this way, what's new is that you can just come out and say it and then carry on with your career.

Cancel culture my arse, there's never been a bigger platform for vicious, nauseating weirdos.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Dec 18, 2022)

That is horrific. I would hope that most of the people who have decided they don't like her can see that that is horrific as well.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Jeremy Clarkson pens a new unhinged call for violence against Markle for the Sun​
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It certainly reads like a pisstake, especially with the mention of Rose West.

From looking at the responses to this, he’s generating a shitload of sympathy for Meghan. 

Will must be furious.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 18, 2022)

It is hard not to slightly hate Megan Markle though tbf. He comes across obsessed and creepy though. I cant believe they published that.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

I've not followed the whole shitshow, but I don't really understand why anyone would hate her?

There's a thread on reddit asking why they didn't show the full face of (I think) their child and people are piling on there, too. Even the pettiest thing seems to confirm people's views.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I've not followed the whole shitshow, but I don't really understand why anyone would hate her?



I heard she got the corgies hooked on methamphetamine..


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

I'm sold that's just evil


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2022)

eeny rich meeny violent miny racist mo cunt


----------



## killer b (Dec 18, 2022)

still, he make great telly shows.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2022)

Mrs Miggins said:


> That is horrific. I would hope that most of the people who have decided they don't like her can see that that is horrific as well.



Good luck with that


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2022)

i dont really hate him id just like to take him outside and execute him in front of his family


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

ska invita said:


> i dont really hate him id just like to take him outside and execute him in front of his family


It's a close call but I wouldn't go quite that far, I do think people should start throwing lumps of excrement at him whenever he's in public though.


----------



## JimW (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> It's a close call but I wouldn't go quite that far, I do think people should start throwing lumps of excrement at him whenever he's in public though.


Don't make him strip naked though, no-one needs to see that.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I've not followed the whole shitshow, but I don't really understand why anyone would hate her?
> 
> There's a thread on reddit asking why they didn't show the full face of (I think) their child and people are piling on there, too. Even the pettiest thing seems to confirm people's views.


For me it’s that on the one hand she’s playing at being this marvellous progressive person whilst having no problem marrying into a very regressive institution/family and enjoying the private planes etc. At least be honest.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> For me it’s that on the one hand she’s playing at being this marvellous progressive person whilst having no problem marrying into a very regressive institution/family and enjoying the private planes etc. At least be honest.



For me it’s the poor meth-corgies, one of which needed to be put down after swallowing its own jawbone.


----------



## Sue (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> *It is hard not to slightly hate Megan Markle though tbf*. He comes across obsessed and creepy though. I cant believe they published that.


Say what?


----------



## killer b (Dec 18, 2022)

Sue said:


> Say what?


presume they mean the media vilification is so intense that it's easy to get swept along with it or something.


----------



## A380 (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I've not followed the whole shitshow, but I don't really understand why anyone would hate her?
> ...


 There is no simple black or white answer to that...


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 18, 2022)

I doubt Clarkson believes anything he says publicly in that way, it’s all just attention seeking behaviour calculated to cause maximum offence. It’s as real as all the things which happen “just by chance” on The Grand Tour or Top Gear Specials when he was doing them. Pure fiction dressed up to look realistic, because he understands that what’s real isn’t the same as what’s interesting.


----------



## Ax^ (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> It is hard not to slightly hate Megan Markle though tbf. He comes across obsessed and creepy though. I cant believe they published that.



what would the sun not print


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> I've not followed the whole shitshow, but I don't really understand why anyone would hate her?


The main reason is something to do with a lot of people in this country being really rather racist.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> I doubt Clarkson believes anything he says publicly in that way, it’s all just attention seeking behaviour calculated to cause maximum offence. It’s as real as all the things which happen “just by chance” on The Grand Tour or Top Gear Specials when he was doing them. Pure fiction dressed up to look realistic.



It’s so silly I’m a little bit surprised that it has caused such (mostly pretend) offence.  Especially with there being plenty of newsworthy things going on right now, but I think that’s probably the point.


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> It’s so silly I’m a little bit surprised that it has caused such (mostly pretend) offence.  Especially with there being plenty of newsworthy things going on right now, but I think that’s probably the point.


I’m sure he‘s delighted that so many people are so easy to wind up. Keeps him gainfully employed while his farming business is not making money.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Jeremy Clarkson pens a new unhinged call for violence against Markle for the Sun​
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe its being taken too seriously and maybe it is to be taken more literally. Who knows?

I can't say I really care though and I have to admit to enjoying the bourgeoisie hating on each other - what an awful, heinous bastard I am and how dare I not pick a faction of the ruling class to side with!


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> Jeremy Clarkson pens a new unhinged call for violence against Markle for the Sun​
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He is a professional troll.
Writing bollocks for his own amusement and then sadly sharing this bollocks with a smug sit back and wait grin.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Dec 18, 2022)

MrCurry said:


> I doubt Clarkson believes anything he says publicly in that way, it’s all just attention seeking behaviour calculated to cause maximum offence. It’s as real as all the things which happen “just by chance” on The Grand Tour or Top Gear Specials when he was doing them. Pure fiction dressed up to look realistic, because he understands that what’s real isn’t the same as what’s interesting.


Yes, exactly.  Same as Katie Hopkins - say stupid outrageous things and enjoy the resultant publicity.  They completely lose sight of the fact that the people they are abusing are real human beings with feelings.  So fucking nasty.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> It is hard not to slightly hate Megan Markle though tbf.



Why?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2022)

Gromit said:


> He is a professional troll.
> Writing bollocks for his own amusement and then sadly sharing this bollocks with a smug sit back and wait grin.


... Don't forget the violent racist bigot multimillionaire aspect


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2022)

..


----------



## Riklet (Dec 18, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Why?



I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2022)

Ah, If so I apologise and delete 
Please amend  your post too 
I'm cranky this morning !


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic.


Is she?  What leads you to that conclusion?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 18, 2022)




----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

AmateurAgitator said:


> View attachment 356179



Oh come on, Meghan's way bigger.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.



Fair enough, but in what way is she narcissistic? I've only ever read about her being so, in the right wing press.

Not saying you're wrong, btw. All I know about her is that she's married to Harry and she was in Suits.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 18, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Fair enough, but in what way is she narcissistic? I've only ever read about her being so, in the right wing press.
> 
> Not saying you're wrong, btw. All I know about her is that she's married to Harry and she was in Suits.




An actor? Narcissistic? Its unheard of I tells ya.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> An actor? Narcissistic? Its unheard of I tells ya.



That’s not exactly evidence.
Also, there are lots of actors who are undeniably a bit narcissistic and who lots of people like.


----------



## SysOut (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.


But you don't hate him.
Does she go around insulting people?
Does she have a column where she can just insult anyone she cares to mention?
Does she use a show, supposedly about cars, to insult british workers?

I don't hate her. I wouldn't even recognise her. As for her husband and in laws - well they just belong to a particular class.

One can see though how the weak-minded can be riled up so easily - to be anti-semite, racist, nationalist - hate foreign leaders and peoples, lynching people - simply through the drip-drip effect of the media.

The BBC was totalitarian radio for more than half a century. Americans, I believe, still watch more TV per day, than any other nation.
Britain has the worst newspapers in the world.

Someone hates someone they have never met and who has had zero effect on their life.
They even believe people are guilty withouit a trial and that they don't deserve a trial - lynching as "justice".
As long as the media says it's ok, it's ok.
If the media doesn't mention something, it's not important.
The people then vote based on what they've been told by the media.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Fair enough, but in what way is she narcissistic? I've only ever read about her being so, in the right wing press.



That's going to happen if you only ever read the right-wing press.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 18, 2022)

Maybe slightly hate was a bit strong. They're a pair of bellends but I dont hate them.

I do reckon some terrible scandal will come out in the next few years of her beating up the home help or something though. And I will feel vindicated.


----------



## Glitter (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> Maybe slightly hate was a bit strong. They're a pair of bellends but I dont hate them.
> 
> I do reckon some terrible scandal will come out in the next few years of her beating up the home help or something though. And I will feel vindicated.



Given the amount of shit she gets for doing literally nothing offensive, you can bet your bonehead that if such a thing existed we would ALL know about it.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Glitter said:


> Given the amount of shit she gets for doing literally nothing offensive...



We have a strong counter-claim - let battle commence!


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 18, 2022)

I mean, what turned me against her is this hard hitting article linking her to drug running and murder.


----------



## JimW (Dec 18, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I mean, what turned me against her is this hard hitting article linking her to drug running and murder.
> 
> View attachment 356186


You're just playing devil's avocado.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Unlike most denizens of this site I am not a Royal watcher, so to feel less out of my depth I just Googled "what has Meghan Markle done now" (the "now" was added by the auto-complete).

There's a lot there, but from the first page I am in no doubt whatsoever that she has had two children.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> Unlike most denizens of this site I am not a Royal watcher, so to feel less out of my depth I just Googled "what has Meghan Markle done now" (the "now" was added by the auto-complete).
> 
> There's a lot there, but from the first page I am in no doubt whatsoever that she has had two children.


With the state of the world's overcrowding? That's just disgusting


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

two sheds said:


> With the state of the world's overcrowding? That's just disgusting



What screams "narcissism" louder than making copies of yourself?


----------



## A380 (Dec 18, 2022)




----------



## hash tag (Dec 18, 2022)

I can't stand Clarkson and would not take anything that comes out of him seriously. I have not read his press article things because I won't touch a Murdoch rag.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 18, 2022)

JimW said:


> You're just playing devil's avocado.


Indeed, but almonds are also criminals. 13% of the total water used in California goes to water almond trees. Avocados are not the only antisocial plant.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Indeed, but almonds are also criminals. 13% of the total water used in California goes to water almond trees. Avocados are not the only antisocial plant.



When Barack Obama was President he would eat 6 almonds every evening.


----------



## Ground Elder (Dec 18, 2022)

Christmas dinner will be fun this year - statement from Clarkson's daughter Emily on her Instagram


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 18, 2022)

I tried watching Clarkson's Farm because so many people said it was excellent, very informative, and worth setting aside one's anti-Clarkson feelings to watch.

I gave it about 10 minutes, which is 9 minutes 30 seconds longer than I'd usually give a Clarkson show, before deciding nope, not going to happen.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2022)

Ground Elder said:


> Christmas dinner will be fun this year - statement from Clarkson'd daughter Emily on her Instagram


It's win win for both of them.

He gets attention and she gets "wait what he has a daughter". 
She's proud to be a narsassist according to one article she wrote. 
Chip off the old block.


----------



## JimW (Dec 18, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> I tried watching Clarkson's Farm because so many people said it was excellent, very informative, and worth setting aside one's anti-Clarkson feelings to watch.
> 
> I gave it about 10 minutes, which is 9 minutes 30 seconds longer than I'd usually give a Clarkson show, before deciding nope, not going to happen.


How many of us were delighted when we misheard that Clarkson had bought the farm only for disappointment when it became clear.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 18, 2022)

JimW said:


> How many of us were delighted when we misheard that Clarkson had bought the farm only for disappointment when it became clear.



"Clarkson's gone for re-education in the countryside, you say?"


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> When Barack Obama was President he would eat 6 almonds every evening.


 Why six?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 18, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> "Clarkson's gone for re-education in the countryside, you say?"



And appears to be upsetting his neighbours on a regular basis.


----------



## CNT36 (Dec 18, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Why six?


Because he hates America.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 18, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Why six?



Five's not enough and seven's too many.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 18, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Five's not enough and seven's too many.


Seven of course eight nine.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Why six?



I think Spy most likely had the answer right.
This is according to an interview with Michell Obama during his presidency, anyway.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 18, 2022)

CNT36 said:


> Because he hates America.



I was expecting a reply along the lines of:

Six almonds contain all the x you need each day, like for example selenium or similar.


----------



## The39thStep (Dec 18, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> I tried watching Clarkson's Farm because so many people said it was excellent, very informative, and worth setting aside one's anti-Clarkson feelings to watch.
> 
> I gave it about 10 minutes, which is 9 minutes 30 seconds longer than I'd usually give a Clarkson show, before deciding nope, not going to happen.


One of the pre match highlights of the Chelsea /Man City CL final in Porto was a City supporter punching Clarkson


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 18, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> And appears to be upsetting his neighbours on a regular basis.



Tbf that’s because he tried to build something and we Don’t Do That Here


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 18, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> Tbf that’s because he tried to build something and we Don’t Do That Here



Aye, everyone wants windfarms, just not too close to me.


----------



## billy_bob (Dec 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If you're sharing an article from The Sun on Urban75 then it obviously worked and he did his job well.



It's been shared endlessly on Twitter as you've probably seen and it's difficult not to shout at everyone to stop helping him do exactly what he was trying to do in the first place.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.



Do you have to side with her to recognise that a lot of the stuff that gets printed about her is unacceptable?

The loons seem to believe the human race is divided clean in two; between people who follow Meghan Markle around hoping for a whiff of one of her farts and people who think she should be burned at the stake in Horse Guards' Parade. The truth is that most people have more important shit to worry about.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 18, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.


It strikes me that what people find irritating about Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, is two-fold, in that, from the perspective of her haters and detractors, she's perceived to be an 'uppity' woman, and moreover an uppity black (bi-racial) woman. And that's unforgivable to some.

It seems to me that what she's done wrong is commit the heinous crimes of being accomplished and confident. Further, she's intelligent and opinionated in the sense of having opinions and being able to articulate them. She's long demonstrated a keen interest in social justice, having spoken out as a school girl against sexist portrayals of women in the media, writing to a company to complain about an advertisement that portrayed washing dishes as a woman's role. As a result, the company changed the advertisement. I can imagine that achievement would have felt good and led to increased confidence in speaking out against injustice.

She seems well-raised, with decent values, and in addition to that confidence has come across as comfortable with media attention, having a public profile. Don't forget, her father's an Emmy-winning lighting/photography director, and she's lived in California, so she's partly grown up in that media sphere, or at least adjacent to it. And then she became an actor herself, had a high profile, became successful in terms of career and financially successful...

And that's in stark contrast to other commoner incomers to the royal family. The virginal Lady Diana the innocent, the ingenue, naive and shy, suckered into an arranged marriage with the express purpose of creating 'an heir and a spare'. Jolly hockey-sticks but gauche Sarah Ferguson of the toe-sucking scandal. And not forgetting that the previous girlfriend of Prince Andrew who was mildly famous in her own right, Koo Stark, was vilified as a 'soft porn star' and ruled unsuitable. Sophie Rhys-Taylor was a professional career woman, worked in PR, thought she could carry on working but was subject to a tabloid sting using her royal status. And so was it any wonder that 'waity Katie' didn't dare embark on a serious career or do anything while waiting for him to pop the question and put a ring on it?

Harry's previous girlfriends had notoriously found the media attention and intrusion problematic, limiting his romantic prospects somewhat...

...then along comes a woman who isn't totally averse to media attention, is used to being the subject of it, sometimes courts it, is confident and articulate, thinks she can handle it (her confidence being a bit misplaced, having only experienced North American sleb media, never having experienced the worst of the UK tabloid gutter press).

She's previously used her public profile for good, spoken on behalf of good causes, probably assumes this is an extension of the same. Naively believes that what were previously her passion projects would now become her full-time role and she could do good and make a difference and that this would be uncontroversial.

Instead, she gets attacked and vilified, she and her now husband are subject to death threats. And don't forget, his great-uncle, Earl? Lord? Mountbatten was assassinated by the IRA. And the Taliban put a bounty on his head because he served in Afghanistan. So the threats are real.

I can't see what she's done wrong or why she's irritating or supposedly self-obsessed. All she's done is be a woman, be black/bi-racial, be intelligent, be educated, be articulate, be confident, be successful, be accomplished, be a passionate advocate for those without a voice, be a feminist who speaks out against sexism and misogyny. At huge personal cost. I see nothing whatsoever that deserves the vitriol and vilification that she's subjected to.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 18, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> It strikes me that what people find irritating about Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, is two-fold, in that, from the perspective of her haters and detractors, she's perceived to be an 'uppity' woman, and moreover an uppity black (bi-racial) woman. And that's unforgivable to some.
> 
> It seems to me that what she's done wrong is commit the heinous crimes of being accomplished and confident. Further, she's intelligent and opinionated in the sense of having opinions and being able to articulate them. She's long demonstrated a keen interest in social justice, having spoken out as a school girl against sexist portrayals of women in the media, writing to a company to complain about an advertisement that portrayed washing dishes as a woman's role. As a result, the company changed the advertisement. I can imagine that achievement would have felt good and led to increased confidence in speaking out against injustice.
> 
> ...



Well i think thats a very fair post and thank you for taking the time to write it as it's definitely thought provoking.


----------



## Edie (Dec 18, 2022)

A powerful man writes that he lies awake fantasising about the humiliation of a woman of colour being stripped naked and shit thrown at her, and an editor reads it and decides to publish it.

Absolutely fucking horrible misogyny and racism laid shamelessly bare. Whatever you think about Markle, this is profoundly disturbing. I pray the day comes when the consequences finally rain down.


----------



## Sue (Dec 18, 2022)

Edie said:


> A powerful man writes that he lies awake fantasising about the humiliation of a woman of colour being stripped naked and shit thrown at her, and an editor reads it and decides to publish it.
> 
> Absolutely fucking horrible misogyny and racism laid shamelessly bare. Whatever you think about Markle, this is profoundly disturbing. I pray the day comes when the consequences finally rain down.


And,  while not in the same league, seemingly equating a democratically-elected politician  and a woman guilty of torturing and murdering a load of young women is also an absolute disgrace.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 18, 2022)

It is because she’s black, but also Harry is still suing the notw and the mail, that’s why this is happening.


----------



## Edie (Dec 18, 2022)

I’m so fucking angry I will lie awake tonight dreaming of the day that men like him are beaten and publicly humiliated. I’m so fucking sick of the absolute impunity that men like this weild their power, how they not only get away with saying aloud the vile fantasies they have when a woman doesn’t _know her place_, they build entire careers on it. They are gross fleshy cogs in the entire greased machine of power and wealth and privilege. The day will come Clarkson and when it does I will not flinch.


----------



## Edie (Dec 18, 2022)

Repton fucking wanker.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Dec 18, 2022)

Edie said:


> A powerful man writes that he lies awake fantasising about the humiliation of a woman of colour being stripped naked and shit thrown at her, and an editor reads it and decides to publish it.
> 
> Absolutely fucking horrible misogyny and racism laid shamelessly bare. Whatever you think about Markle, this is profoundly disturbing. I pray the day comes when the consequences finally rain down.


it's deranged....I hope she gets a restraining order to stop the twat ever going within a thousand miles of her.


----------



## Edie (Dec 18, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> it's deranged....I hope she gets a restraining order to stop the twat ever going within a thousand miles of her.


He gets invited to a do with Jeremy Vine and Camilla shortly after. This is the machine. Watch it work. It’s gross.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 18, 2022)

sleaterkinney said:


> It is because she’s black, but also Harry is still suing the notw and the mail, that’s why this is happening.


The NOTW hasn't been in print for over 11 years.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 18, 2022)

Jeremy Clarkson has always struck me as a deeply unhappy man.

Thiis is not to excuse him. I loathed him for a variety of reasons before this, even when others were finding an equal number of reasons to argue that he wasn't really as awful as he might appear at first sight to be.

But I can't help thinking that his very existence is probably more punishment for him than any that external forces could exact. Not that I'm not happy that he seems to have gone too far this time for even the average DM reader, and will suffer accordingly.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 18, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The NOTW hasn't been in print for over 11 years.


He’s still suing  it for phone hacking.









						After Meghan’s victory, Harry has phone hackers in his sights
					

Analysis: the prince may be prepared to risk a costly lawsuit against the Sun and Mirror, rather than settling




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 18, 2022)

ska invita said:


> i dont really hate him id just like to take him outside and execute him in front of his family



Jesus he is some piece of hate.  
The comment about trains not stopping if there is a suicide on the line....
He is full of nastiness and hate.


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 18, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Jesus he is some piece of hate.
> The comment about trains not stopping if there is a suicide on the line....
> He is full of nastiness and hate.


I wish it was his suicide


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Dec 18, 2022)

Edie said:


> He gets invited to a do with Jeremy Vine and Camilla shortly after. This is the machine. Watch it work. It’s gross.


that was great timing, I guess Camilla's evil side. The sooner the whole royal family is got rid of the better. The whole point of it is that it's a racist enterprise. They are a race superior to us as they are anointed by god thanks to their lineage.


----------



## Sue (Dec 18, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> Jeremy Clarkson has always struck me as a deeply unhappy man.
> 
> Thiis is not to excuse him. I loathed him for a variety of reasons before this, even when others were finding an equal number of reasons to argue that he wasn't really as awful as he might appear at first sight to be.
> 
> But I can't help thinking that his very existence is probably more punishment for him than any that external forces could exact. Not that I'm not happy that he seems to have gone too far this time for even the average DM reader, and will suffer accordingly.


Fuck him frankly.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Dec 18, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> I wish it was his suicide


don't stoop to his level...it's Murdoch that needs reigning in


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 18, 2022)

sleaterkinney said:


> He’s still suing  it for phone hacking.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fair enough, although I expect it's News Corp UK given the NOTW no longer exists.


----------



## Edie (Dec 18, 2022)

Sue said:


> Fuck him frankly.


Quite. I couldn’t care less if he was deeply miserable. Which he clearly fucking isn’t anyway. Why make excuses. Baffling.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 18, 2022)

I'm not aware that I made excuses. I explicitly said that I wasn't making excuses. I also said that I loathed him. I am not sure which of those statements was ambiguous.

However, as the above poster apparently knows him and believes he's quite happy, I shall bow to their superior knowledge. Better them than me.


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 19, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> don't stoop to his level...it's Murdoch that needs reigning in


Murdoch is scum, but Clarkson's comments are his own. He'll get away with it of course because no one will stand up to him. This is the problem with the culture wars and media, particularly social media. No one ever stands up to these scumbags and reigns them in. The social media landscape is full of these cunts and the minute someone calls them out they will cry "cancel culture" at the perceived loss of privilege.

If Clarkson died, I don't care how, I wouldn't shed any tears.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

Even his daughter thinks he's a prick. 









						Jeremy Clarkson’s daughter speaks out against father’s Meghan Markle rant
					

‘I remain standing in support of those that are targeted with online hatred,’ said podcast host




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

If he still gets to have tv shows and newspaper columns after this , then I think it’s no longer about him it’s what the fuck kind of society have we got where people want to look at his face and hear what he has to say .


----------



## Plumdaff (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> If he still gets to have tv shows and newspaper columns after this , then I think it’s no longer about him it’s what the fuck kind of society have we got where people want to look at his face and hear what he has to say .


Sadly, I think he'll be fine. The kind of people who like him agree with him about this, and all the other shit he's got away with. He's establishment.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Dec 19, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Murdoch is scum, but Clarkson's comments are his own. He'll get away with it of course because no one will stand up to him. This is the problem with the culture wars and media, particularly social media. No one ever stands up to these scumbags and reigns them in. The social media landscape is full of these cunts and the minute someone calls them out they will cry "cancel culture" at the perceived loss of privilege.
> 
> If Clarkson died, I don't care how, I wouldn't shed any tears.


I agree, but we have a situation where social media companies are not "publishers" of the views they disseminate. Newspapers are, and have liabilities associated with that. These abhorrent views were published in a Murdoch rag and went through an editorial process.

I wouldn't shed tears in event of his demise, but I'd not wish his suicide.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 19, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Jesus he is some piece of hate.
> The comment about trains not stopping if there is a suicide on the line....
> He is full of nastiness and hate.


But haven't you watched Clarkson's Farm? I respect the guy and I think he's maybe turned a corner.

* sarcasm *


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 19, 2022)

pseudonarcissus said:


> I agree, but we have a situation where social media companies are not "publishers" of the views they disseminate. Newspapers are, and have liabilities associated with that. These abhorrent views were published in a Murdoch rag and went through an editorial process.
> 
> I wouldn't shed tears in event of his demise, but I'd not wish his suicide.


In the end nothing will be done. There's no equality of views here so he won't ever feel the discomfrot of having is violence thrown back at him


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> Sadly, I think he'll be fine. The kind of people who like him agree with him about this, and all the other shit he's got away with. He's establishment.


Who is it, who watches his stuff I haven't got a clue tbh i know he used to be cars and now he's vegetables but what is this audience that follows him around like that what do they actually like him for ? 
As a non-follower of any of it it just seems deeply disturbing that a man who writes that thing he just wrote will maintain the respect of any kind of mainstream audience, who are these people.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 19, 2022)

Acting like the brat they'd like to be.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Who is it, who watches his stuff I haven't got a clue tbh i know he used to be cars and now he's vegetables but what is this audience that follows him around like that what do they actually like him for ?


the farm show has a long and approving thread on these forums. the car show used to have a load of people on here watch it too. I think he probably makes good telly, whatever that is.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Who is it, who watches his stuff I haven't got a clue tbh i know he used to be cars and now he's vegetables but what is this audience that follows him around like that what do they actually like him for ?
> As a non-follower of any of it it just seems deeply disturbing that a man who writes that thing he just wrote will maintain the respect of any kind of mainstream audience, who are these people.



Boris Johnson used to write exactly this sort of newspaper column in the late 80s and early 90s, as I'm sure you know he quickly faded into obscurity.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 19, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Indeed, but almonds are also criminals. 13% of the total water used in California goes to water almond trees. Avocados are not the only antisocial plant.


I think you should try and understand things from the almond's perspective a little better


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Boris Johnson used to write exactly this sort of newspaper column in the late 80s and early 90s, as I'm sure you know he quickly faded into obscurity.


Did he really ? Write his violent fantasies about sexually humiliating a famous woman and saying “everyone my age feels the same”? Not sure he did. This isn’t about ‘wokeness’ anymore that article was properly deranged.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 19, 2022)

The Sun + Jeremy Clarkson.   I'm not sure what anyone really expects from that sort of relationship. He's like a Punch and Judy show, in that some cunts will think he's being funny.


----------



## kalidarkone (Dec 19, 2022)

Riklet said:


> I think she's fucking irritating and self obsessed and deeply narcissistic. Yes she's a woman of colour who's had a raw deal from the royal family and the media but sorry, I can't stand the woman. Her and Harry are just as awful as the rest of them but in a different way. I recognise due the the culture wars surrounding this whole thing this may be a very unpopular and controversial view and I am meant to side with her as some kind of heroic victim but. _shrugs_ Theres several billion other people out there having a raw time I would rather save my emotional energy for. I dont want her paraded around in public though or anything Jesus.


Wow, you were only asked why? 😆 why so defensive? It's OK to dislike people of colour (along as it's not the reason- which is not what I'm saying btw). You have recognised that MM has has experienced racism from the royals......but that in itself is so unsurprising that I would of only been surprised if she had been welcomed with open arms!

I don't care either way about Harry and Megan, but do find it interesting that Harry has chosen his life rather then acquiesced to the Royal family.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2022)

kalidarkone said:


> I don't care either way about Harry and Megan, but do find it interesting that Harry has chosen his life rather than acquiesced to the Royal family.


They’ve both opted to use Harry’s unique position to help line their pockets which I find to be rather dull and predictable tbh.


----------



## kalidarkone (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> They’ve both opted to use Harry’s unique position to help line their pockets which I find to be rather dull and predictable tbh.


Yeah I would too if I was them.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> They’ve both opted to use Harry’s unique position to help line their pockets which I find to be rather dull and predictable tbh.



Well they need to get money from somewhere. This seems as good a way as any.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2022)

kalidarkone said:


> Yeah I would too if I was them.


You’d perhaps not incessantly bleat how ghastly it all was.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

He's bleating about how specific parts of it are ghastly rather than all of it isn't he? The racism his wife received from his family for eg.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> They’ve both opted to use Harry’s unique position to help line their pockets which I find to be rather dull and predictable tbh.


What should they do to earn their living?  Would they be able to get normal jobs and live normal lives?


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 19, 2022)

Sasaferrato said:


> Avocados are not the only antisocial plant.


Winterson's less lauded sequel.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> the farm show has a long and approving thread on these forums. the car show used to have a load of people on here watch it too. I think he probably makes good telly, whatever that is.


I watched and enjoyed Clarksons Farm.  It was entertaining and thought-provoking.  

That doesn't mean I can't call him a cunt for writing that revolting article.


----------



## Voley (Dec 19, 2022)

I saw that thing about chucking shit at Meghan Markle Game of Thrones 'walk of shame' style on Twitter. I thought it was a spittle-flecked letter from one of their particularly loopy readers, didn't realise it was from a commentator, of sorts.

I know professional pantomime villains like him, Piers Morgan etc make a good living out of manufacturing outrage but still. Fucking hell.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

ElizabethofYork said:


> I watched and enjoyed Clarksons Farm.  It was entertaining and thought-provoking.
> 
> That doesn't mean I can't call him a cunt for writing that revolting article.


Sure. What does he need to do for you to choose not to watch his shows?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> What does he need to do for you to choose not to watch his shows?



Make shit shows.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2022)

I never watched Top Gear or his farm thing but have seen him on Who Wants to be a Millionaire.


----------



## kalidarkone (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You’d perhaps not incessantly bleat how ghastly it all was.


Tbh I probably would 😆 They are a bunch of cunts after all.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Make shit shows.


I kind of agree with this, up to a point - but there's a level of terrible behaviour beyond which it feels a bit ick to continue financially supporting someone. I listened to a new Morrissey song the other day and have to recognise it was pretty good, but I won't be listening again or buying the album, and rarely listen to the Smiths since he came out as a fascist. I don't think I'll be seeking out any of Kanye West's new albums, which I did do from time to time previously. I don't care for Clarkson's shows, but I think publishing this kind of eyewatering misogyny might be the point at which I'd consider stepping away, if I did.


----------



## editor (Dec 19, 2022)

At least his daughter's not a fucking arsehole


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> I kind of agree with this, up to a point - but there's a level of terrible behaviour beyond which it feels a bit ick to continue financially supporting someone. I listened to a new Morrissey song the other day and have to recognise it was pretty good, but I won't be listening again or buying the album, and rarely listen to the Smiths since he came out as a fascist. I don't think I'll be seeking out any of Kanye West's new albums, which I did do from time to time previously. I don't care for Clarkson's shows, but I think publishing this kind of eyewatering misogyny might be the point at which I'd consider stepping away, if I did.



Yes. I stopped watching TG after “the slope on the bridge”, and have only watched his farm thing since, which was good.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Can’t imagine choosing to spend time watching anything with him in it, he can’t be funny or clever or anything enough to make that seem a good use of time even if I was really into cars or farming or whatever else pays him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I never watched Top Gear or his farm thing but have seen him on Who Wants to be a Millionaire.


((((Magnus McGinty))))


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Make shit shows.


This is it. I mean, I think he does exactly that. I’ve never been remotely interested in Top Gear, or shows like it, whoever presents them.  It’s just noise, and not in a good way.  For me, I don’t need to boycott him, because he doesn’t come into my radar anyway, other than when he over steps his mark and this thread gets bumped. 

However, if you like his output, I’m sure there’s a fair bit of blind eye turning goes on.


----------



## Flavour (Dec 19, 2022)

i think it's about time there was a vicious arson campaign in chipping norton


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2022)

Never got the whole 'middle-aged men getting hard ons about cars' thing anyway (though each to their own), so can't appraise the "makes good telly" defence. And there aren't any others. 

There are plenty of lonely stools in pubs where he can have a 'platform' to fail to enjoy the privileges life has dealt him should he wish to.


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 19, 2022)

AmateurAgitator said:


> But haven't you watched Clarkson's Farm? I respect the guy and I think he's maybe turned a corner.
> 
> * sarcasm *


😊


I cant look at him without vomiting a bit. So .... no..


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

chilango said:


> Never got the whole 'middle-aged men getting hard ons about cars' thing ...



That's because it's never been a thing. Anyone with an interest in cars would have watched TG for a while but the antics of the presenters got boring and overshadowed the good stuff for many.


----------



## A380 (Dec 19, 2022)

This is nothing to do with my penis not working properly anymore. By Jeremy Clarkson
					

MY hatred of Meghan that’s cellular and keeps me awake at night has no connection, I can categorically state, with my non-functioning penis.




					www.thedailymash.co.uk


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 19, 2022)

Plumdaff said:


> Sadly, I think he'll be fine. The kind of people who like him agree with him about this, and all the other shit he's got away with. He's establishment.





bimble said:


> If he still gets to have tv shows and newspaper columns after this , then I think it’s no longer about him it’s what the fuck kind of society have we got where people want to look at his face and hear what he has to say .


I think you're both right.

I suspect he'll continue with no consequences, because he gets the clicks, generates traffic to the website. And the misogynoir will tell us about who and what we are as a society.


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You’d perhaps not incessantly bleat how ghastly it all was.



Speaking out to protect your family is not "incessant bleating".
He has a wife and 2 very young children. Like it or not they are not an ordinary run of the mill family. They have ties to a monarchy and he obviously feels that they need to feel and be secure.  

So he will do whatever is necessary to ensure that he can pay for security seeing as his own family want nothing to do with his wife.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> That's because it's never been a thing.


It so has. Where we lived before Lady La Rouge knew a group of women and I was occasionally forced to socialise with their husbands. Their whole ability to converse involved cars and golf.  It was torture. 

Lady LR would say “You don’t like Catriona and Iain, do you?” It wasn’t that I didn’t like them, it was just impossible for me to spend any time with the male part of the party. 

The men also had “poker nights”.  Kill me now.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Who is it, who watches his stuff I haven't got a clue tbh i know he used to be cars and now he's vegetables but what is this audience that follows him around like that what do they actually like him for ?
> As a non-follower of any of it it just seems deeply disturbing that a man who writes that thing he just wrote will maintain the respect of any kind of mainstream audience, who are these people.


I used to like watching Top Gear and found it entertaining. Also, the cinematography is excellent. The production standards were so high. So well made. And much of the banter between Clarkson, Hammond and May was funny. 

At some point I stopped watching though. The incident where Clarkson punched a producer over not getting a steak dinner was unedifying, to be sure. Also becoming more aware through social media over the years of the content of his newspaper columns. Kind of like a bit when you're watching a teen movie and the cool kids have a leader who makes digs at other kids, and sometimes the snark is a bit funny, but then it crosses a line and you realise they're not really funny, they're just a bully.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It so has. Where we lived before Lady La Rouge knew a group of women and I was occasionally forced to socialise with their husbands. Their whole ability to converse involved cars and golf.  It was torture.
> 
> Lady LR would say “You don’t like Catriona and Iain, do you?” It wasn’t that I didn’t like them, it was just impossible for me to spend any time with the male part of the party.
> 
> The men also had “poker nights”.  Kill me now.


I agree on blokes who can only chat about cars or sport but surely anyone can enjoy a game of cards?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I agree on blokes who can only chat about cars or sport but surely anyone can enjoy a game of cards?


No. Christ, it’s horrifying.


----------



## pbsmooth (Dec 19, 2022)

yeah. a game of cards seems the opposite of golf and cars. do you maybe just not like socialising?


----------



## Aladdin (Dec 19, 2022)

And I cannot believe that I am defending a royal..

Harry does seem to be sickened by the "firm" and the way his own family is terrified of upsetting the royal correspondents. 

It's almost as if Harry has suddenly realised the lunacy of the Monarchy and he is effectively pointing and shouting that King Charles is naked.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> yeah. a game of cards seems the opposite of golf and cars. do you maybe just not like socialising?


I love socialising. I just hate gambling. It’s boring. It gets in the way of socialising.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

Cards is fun, gambling is awful


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> Cards is fun, gambling is awful


Poker nights, they had. Those men. Playing poker. No thanks.


----------



## Santino (Dec 19, 2022)

I can just imagine a group of men sat around playing poker, all secretly hating it because it's not like it is in James Bond, and all pretending to love it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> It's almost as if Harry has suddenly realised the lunacy of the Monarchy and he is effectively pointing and shouting that King Charles is naked.


I wish he would. I wish he’d just say “Meg lent me this book by Chomsky, and you know what, I renounce my title”.  I’d have some respect for that.


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2022)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> At some point I stopped watching though. The incident where Clarkson punched a producer over not getting a steak dinner was unedifying, to be sure.


Not sure I'd call it 'unedifying'. He assaulted someone at work. Surely more like 'criminal' or 'disgraceful' or 'completely unacceptable?

(Can't remember if he got done for it or not but he should've been.)


----------



## JimW (Dec 19, 2022)

Three card brag schools in back of a work van are OK.


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> Cards is fun, gambling is awful


Cards are really dull. Worse than board games.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Santino said:


> I can just imagine a group of men sat around playing poker, all secretly hating it because it's not like it is in James Bond, and all pretending to love it.


That’s another thing. They all liked James Bond films. If I ever got them onto films it was films I had no interest in. Car chases and shit.


----------



## kalidarkone (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> I kind of agree with this, up to a point - but there's a level of terrible behaviour beyond which it feels a bit ick to continue financially supporting someone. I listened to a new Morrissey song the other day and have to recognise it was pretty good, but I won't be listening again or buying the album, and rarely listen to the Smiths since he came out as a fascist. I don't think I'll be seeking out any of Kanye West's new albums, which I did do from time to time previously. I don't care for Clarkson's shows, but I think publishing this kind of eyewatering misogyny might be the point at which I'd consider stepping away, if I did.


Yeah I agree. I turned the radio from 5 live to Radio 4 today because I thought they said Jeremy Clarkson was on next and I don't want him in my house!

I can't watch celebrity goggle box that features Lawrence Fox for similar reasons....I just get the super ick.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

kalidarkone said:


> I can't watch celebrity goggle box that features Lawrence Fox for similar reasons....I just get the super ick.


He’s not on that any more, and when he was I was unaware of his politics. I did find his body language with his cousin disturbing, though.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No. Christ, it’s horrifying.


Even cribbage Danny?


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 19, 2022)

redsquirrel said:


> Even cribbage Danny?



According to:
6 Card Games Every Man Should Know - The Art of Manliness 



> The game of cribbage has been beloved by men for centuries. (...) There are two parts to cribbage: pegging (numerically counting your and your opponent’s cards up to 31) and counting (making sets, runs, and 15s with your cards — see rules for more detail).



(Personally, I don't much like counting and never really fancied pegging).


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

redsquirrel said:


> Even cribbage Danny?


I’ve never played. 

I’m not a hard pass against card games as such, I just don’t care about things like that.  If it’s something people aren’t taking seriously and just using as a back drop to having a drink and a blether, it’s fine.  My late M-I-L would always suggest playing cards, but she wouldn’t mind if I didn’t try to win or forgot the rules.  That was fine, and she was good company so it was OK.  But people taking it seriously and losing money? I don’t think that’s fun.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> The Art of Manliness


I don’t think I’m very manly.  Which I’m fine with.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Anyway, I’ve de-railed the thread. I know it’s just a motormouth edge lord doing what he does, but if he’s normalising misogyny and racism, that’s not cool, and I don’t mean to minimise it.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think I’m very manly.  Which I’m fine with.



Not too sure about the advice on that site to be honest, even if I was interested.






Meanwhile back at knob central


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Not too sure about the advice on that site to be honest, even if I was interested.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bullshit.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 19, 2022)

So now Clarkson has apologised for the hurt caused - and will think carefully about saying/writing  such things in the future - is he disagreeing with himself ? - is he part woke now?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

I didn’t know it was a Game of Thrones reference, as I didn’t watch it. But he clearly thinks that lets him off the hook. It doesn’t. If he’d said “I’d like to watch her shag a dragon” I’d have guessed the reference, but it wouldn’t be any better. As the frankly weird reference to Rose West and Nicola Sturgeon suggests, he just hates women.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 19, 2022)

"Oh dear", I'm surprised wasn't followed by "naughty me"


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Sue said:


> Bullshit.


More succinctly put.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I didn’t know it was a Game of Thrones reference, as I didn’t watch it. But he clearly thinks that lets him off the hook. It doesn’t. If he’d said “I’d like to watch her shag am dragon” I’d have guessed the reference, but it wouldn’t be any better. As the frankly weird reference to Rose West and Nicola Sturgeon suggests, he just hates women.


I've read most of the books - it doesn't mean that I'd say what Clarkson said , to someone. And yes, he hates women - nice to see his daughter calling him out though - should make an interesting Christmas dinner.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

marty21 said:


> I've read most of the books - it doesn't mean that I'd say what Clarkson said , to someone.


Exactly.


----------



## JimW (Dec 19, 2022)

The old non-apology apology.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 19, 2022)

I think it's quite possible that he is genuinely extremely sorry that many people weren't cultured enough to get his Game of Thrones reference.

It's target audience clearly did however. For me it was a toss-up as to whether it was the fans smugly pointing the reference out, or the fans claiming that the Sun editor who approved the article was a woman, who I would most like to see being publicly chastised alongside him.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 19, 2022)

Game of Thrones my arse. So if someone wrote 'Clarkson deserves public crucifixion' it would be OK cos it's a Biblical reference?


----------



## marty21 (Dec 19, 2022)

JimW said:


> The old non-apology apology.


Yeah, I hadn't actually read the 'apology' and when i actually did - it was a very non apology - almost a sorry I was caught sort of thing .


----------



## klang (Dec 19, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Game of Thrones my arse. So if someone wrote 'Clarkson deserves public crucifixion' it would be OK cos it's a Biblical reference?


sure, even when not referencing the bible


----------



## Voley (Dec 19, 2022)

Voley said:


> I saw that thing about chucking shit at Meghan Markle Game of Thrones 'walk of shame' style on Twitter.


I got the reference. Doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. Fucking prick.


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> That's because it's never been a thing. Anyone with an interest in cars would have watched TG for a while but the antics of the presenters got boring and overshadowed the good stuff for many.


I will defer to your knowledge and experience in these matters.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Voley said:


> I got the reference. Doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. Fucking prick.


exactly. i got the reference too, what difference is that supposed to make. He's not 'caused hurt' the arsewipe its anger.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 19, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Game of Thrones my arse. So if someone wrote 'Clarkson deserves public crucifixion' it would be OK cos it's a Biblical reference?


It would be ok so long as you meant it literally and had already bought the wood.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 19, 2022)

I do wonder if he'd ever make a similar reference to an unattractive (YMMV as to who) woman walking down the street naked. I suspect he'd be the first to demand she cover up no matter how penitent or shamed she was.


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> It so has. Where we lived before Lady La Rouge knew a group of women and I was occasionally forced to socialise with their husbands. Their whole ability to converse involved cars and golf.  It was torture.
> 
> Lady LR would say “You don’t like Catriona and Iain, do you?” It wasn’t that I didn’t like them, it was just impossible for me to spend any time with the male part of the party.
> 
> The men also had “poker nights”.  Kill me now.


These are the "other people" that Sartre had in mind...


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> I do wonder if he'd ever make a similar reference to an unattractive (YMMV as to who) woman walking down the street naked. I suspect he'd be the first to demand she cover up.


him and the other one Morgan, they're obviosuly sexually obsessed with her, the weird thing is that they're not ashamed to display that in its most fucked up form day after day, that they aren't embarrassed by it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> him and the other one Morgan, they're obviosuly sexually obsessed with her, the weird thing is that they're not ashamed to display that in its most fucked up form day after day, that they aren't embarrassed by it.


I don’t think they know. I think it’s entirely Freudian and they’ve no idea the rest of the world can see they just fancy the woman and know she wouldn’t be interested in them.


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2022)

...and the obsession similar men have with Greta Thunberg.


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Lady LR would say “You don’t like Catriona and Iain, do you?” It wasn’t that I didn’t like them, it was just impossible for me to spend any time with the male part of the party.



But how can you say that you liked them if you couldn't spend any time with one of them?

It seems to me that the confusion lies in the fact that, in English, 'I don't like X' means 'I dislike X'. There is really no simple way of expressing the common enough of experience of encountering someone you have absolutely no ill will towards, but have nothing to say to. You don't actively dislike them, but you don't actively like them either -- you'd never look forward to a situation where they would be present, for example. But if someone asked you whether you liked X, you'd probably say, 'Sure, I like X, lovely person,' because that's what most people do.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

It’s not just ‘fancy’ obviously it’s also about women who speak out of turn, don’t know their place in relation to big important men like themselves, seems to drive them mad. That they get paid to display their fucked up rage and frustration all over our media is the thing though.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> It’s not just ‘fancy’ obviously it’s also about women who speak out of turn, don’t know their place in relation to big important men like themselves, seems to drive them mad. That they get paid to display their fucked up rage and frustration all over our media is the thing though.


It's about power innit.

Stripping Meghan of her power and agency.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 19, 2022)

It's all about publicity; he has even made the Guardian (indirectly) over this and apparently recieved lots of complaints









						Murdoch was due to host Ipso chair despite complaints about Clarkson’s Meghan comments
					

Exclusive: Lord Faulks oversees regulator that will ultimately have to rule on whether Sun broke guidelines




					www.theguardian.com
				




For the record, i like cars and can't stand Clarkson and can't watch his shows or read his columns.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

ouirdeaux said:


> But how can you say that you liked them if you couldn't spend any time with one of them?


I didn’t say I liked them.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> It’s not just ‘fancy’ obviously it’s also about women who speak out of turn, don’t know their place in relation to big important men like themselves, seems to drive them mad. That they get paid to display their fucked up rage and frustration all over our media is the thing though.


Of course.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

I resent the fact that he wrote something so disturbing that it caused me to spend time thinking about him and his existence, hopefully it wont happen again.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

hash tag said:


> For the record, i like cars and can't stand Clarkson and can't watch his shows or read his columns.



I've been thinking about this and can't say I boycot anyone's output because of their politics or views. If the subject matter interests me, I'll read or watch it regardless. The closest I get is not watching films with John Wayne or Jason Statham in them but that's because Wayne was a shit actor and Statham's films are all crap.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

wait, is Jason Statham a wrong 'un??


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> wait, is Jason Statham a wrong 'un??



Dunno. Is he?


----------



## JimW (Dec 19, 2022)

The gold body paint music vid says no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I've been thinking about this and can't say I boycot anyone's output because of their politics or views. If the subject matter interests me, I'll read or watch it regardless. The closest I get is not watching films with John Wayne or Jason Statham in them but that's because Wayne was a shit actor and Statham's films are all crap.


his true grit's quite good and i like the full version of 'down by the glenside' in the 1950 'rio grande'

although being as it's set in 1879 and the fenian rising was in 1867, the lyrics of the song (eg it was fifty long years since i saw the auld woman) don't really fit


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I've been thinking about this and can't say I boycot anyone's output because of their politics or views. If the subject matter interests me, I'll read or watch it regardless. The closest I get is not watching films with John Wayne or Jason Statham in them but that's because Wayne was a shit actor and Statham's films are all crap.


I don’t know if it counts as boycotting when you just think someone is a dickhead so you choose to not spend your time listening to them.
Maybe his tv show about a farm is amazing and my life would be improved by watching it but I seriously doubt it. I’ve been listening to Kanye West lately though, he did do some good songs.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> I don’t know if it counts as boycotting when you just think someone is a dickhead so you choose to not spend your time listening to them.



That's exactly what it is.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> wait, is Jason Statham a wrong 'un??


I didn’t know the name so I just did a picture search. Don’t know the face either.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> That's exactly what it is.


No it isn’t. I don’t boycott football. I just have no interest in it, so never see it.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No it isn’t. I don’t boycott football. I just have no interest in it, so never see it.



Football's not a person.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Football's not a person.


I don’t boycott [famous footballer], then.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> That's exactly what it is.


I think to boycott his tv show I’d have to be denying myself it, like I’d want to watch but refuse to which isn’t the situation I’m in. If you’re just not remotely interested in consuming something i don’t think that counts as a boycott.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> I think to boycott his tv show I’d have to be denying myself it, like I’d want to watch but refuse to which isn’t the situation I’m in.


Indeed. I am in the same position.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> I think to boycott his tv show I’d have to be denying myself it, like I’d want to watch but refuse to which isn’t the situation I’m in. If you’re just not remotely interested in consuming something i don’t think that counts as a boycott.



But you said you don't read or watch him because you think he's a dickhead, not because you've no interest in his stuff. It follows that if he produced something that you find wildy interesting you still wouldn't watch it because ... you think he's a dickhead. You're refusing to watch something you'd otherwise enjoy in protest of him being a dickhead. That's pretty much a definition of a boycott.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> But you said you don't read or watch him because you think he's a dickhead, not because you've no interest in his stuff. It follows that if he produced something that you find wildy interesting you still wouldn't watch it because ... you think he's a dickhead. You're refusing to watch something you'd otherwise enjoy in protest at him being a dickhead. That's pretty much a definition of a boycott.


it's not a protest, i just can't imagine him (a dickhead) creating or writing or saying anything i'd enjoy. Maybe I'm missing out, but i'll survive.
A few weeks ago there was a tv show about antisemitism which is a subject that does interest me quite a lot, but the tv show was starring another man who i think is a dickhead, so i didn't bother, and that wasn't a boycott either, just I didn't want to invite a person I don't like into my house for an hour because i find him really annoying.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t boycott [famous footballer], then.


I do think football’s a dickhead, though.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I've been thinking about this and can't say I boycot anyone's output because of their politics or views. If the subject matter interests me, I'll read or watch it regardless. The closest I get is not watching films with John Wayne or Jason Statham in them but that's because Wayne was a shit actor and Statham's films are all crap.


I can't say I actually boycott him. I can't stand him and find him immensely irritating, possibly more than anyone I can think of.


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2022)

Why is there - almost - a sense here that "boycotting" something/someone is a bit of a bad thing?

Surely it's a good thing to choose not to consume the products of those you find ethically indefensible?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Football's not a person.


But rhythm is a dancer


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

chilango said:


> Why is there - almost - a sense here that "boycotting" something/someone is a bit of a bad thing?
> 
> Surely it's a good thing to choose not to consume the products of those you find ethically indefensible?


Or to refuse to offer social contact to those who have violated the wishes of a community


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> But you said you don't read or watch him because you think he's a dickhead, not because you've no interest in his stuff. It follows that if he produced something that you find wildy interesting you still wouldn't watch it because ... you think he's a dickhead. You're refusing to watch something you'd otherwise enjoy in protest of him being a dickhead. That's pretty much a definition of a boycott.


I get what Bimble's saying. I think I'm the same. There are lots of things I'm interested in, but 'X investigates Y' isn't just about Y. It's about X's relation with Y. However much I may be interested in Y, I may not be interested at all in X's relation with Y.


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> I think to boycott his tv show I’d have to be denying myself it, like I’d want to watch but refuse to which isn’t the situation I’m in. If you’re just not remotely interested in consuming something i don’t think that counts as a boycott.


Yes, it's like boycotting the Sun when you've no interest in reading it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2022)

Sue said:


> Yes, it's like boycotting the Sun when you've no interest in reading it.


I've boycotted prawn cocktail crisps for decades now.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

chilango said:


> Why is there - almost - a sense here that "boycotting" something/someone is a bit of a bad thing?



Nobody has said that. Some boycotts are perfectly reasonable.

Pilch and Bimble just seem to be going out of their ways to deny that's what it is though.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Trying to imagine a topic that Jeremy Clarkson does a tv show about which I would find so compelling that i'd have to watch it for the info it contained and nope cant think of a one.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Nobody has said that. Some boycotts are perfectly reasonable.
> 
> Pilch and Bimble just seem to be going out of their ways to deny that's what it is though.


Am i boycotting aubergines or do i just not like them much. who can tell.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Trying to imagine a topic that Jeremy Clarkson does a tv show about which I would fuind so compelling that i'd have to watch it for the info it contained and nope cant think of a one.


tbh the farm thing sounded like it might be good, but I barely watch any telly at all anyway so it didn't end up being one of the things I got round to watching. Clarkson's loathsomeness was probably part of the mix of reasons I didn't watch it, but it's not the primary reason.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Sue said:


> Yes, it's like boycotting the Sun when you've no interest in reading it.


yeah its too easy, so it doesn't count. If i was boycotting something I think i'd have to feel i was missing out making at least some effort. But tbh i do find it surprising that lots of people on here have apparently been enjoying his shows.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)

I am not boycotting Clarkson, but I don't watch who wants to be a millionaire because I don't like the show, I don't read the Sun because if I want to look topless teenage tits as young as my daughter if I had one, I can do that for free on the internet but I don't, and I didn't watch the TopGear follow on program because I wasn't going to sign on to a new TV channel just to watch the idiotic trio pissing about. 

I used to watch old TopGear though, not every week but sometimes and sometimes on Dave, because I enjoyed it - a bit. 

Even May and Hammond knew Clarkson was a dick, and they said so over that punch a producer issue which ended their association with TopGear. 

And I don't watch the new TopGear either, can't stand the new presenters.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

weltweit said:


> I don't read the Sun because if I want to look topless teenage tits as young as my daughter if I had one


they cancelled page 3 at least a decade ago


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> they cancelled page 3 at least a decade ago


Oh, shows how in touch I am. Still not interested in reading it.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Right im doing it, going to watch his farm show for at least ten mins and see.

eta 1 min in and i hate it.
eta sod that, not doing ten mins.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 19, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've boycotted prawn cocktail crisps for decades now.


Why?


----------



## ouirdeaux (Dec 19, 2022)

It's the only way to make them understand.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Right im doing it, going to watch his farm show for at least ten mins and see.
> 
> eta 1 min in and i hate it.
> eta sod that, not doing ten mins.


Actually, I did see an episode of Clarkson's farm and quite enjoyed it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Right im doing it, going to watch his farm show for at least ten mins and see.
> 
> eta 1 min in and i hate it.
> eta sod that, not doing ten mins.


Was this including the opening credits?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

weltweit said:


> Actually, I did see an episode of Clarkson's farm and quite enjoyed it.


Yeh but no one here would accuse you of having taste


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)




----------



## editor (Dec 19, 2022)

I changed the title to reflect the ongoing twattery of this ghastly tosspot.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 19, 2022)

It's a simple matter for me: I have no desire to watch 'Clarkson's Farm', so I don't, and therefore don't consider I am boycotting it by not watching.

If, however, Amazon trailed a forthcoming episode in which the serfs who labour on Clarkson's farmland unwisely disturb a Bronze Age round barrow, thus awaking from its 4,000-year sleep the shambling remains of a malevolent priest or shaman who then wreaked merciless revenge upon Clarkson, culminating in the odious twat evacuating his bowels live on TV while being impaled up the tradesmans by a rampaging horde of fly-agaric crazed wild boar... well, that would certainly appeal to me, and to decide _not_ to watch such a televisual spectacle, thus depriving myself of much viewing pleasure and self-education about prehistoric ritual practices - that would be a boycott.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Was this including the opening credits?


The intro, yes. First a montage of lots of dynamic manly shots of his previous life as a superstar carman and then the intro to the farm "nestled" so nestled amongst the Cotswolds, then something about tractors. 
He is in shot and talking the whole time, the writing is shit its his self centred monologue in his crappy voice so i just am not interested and i think thats ok. He wouldn't like me either.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 19, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> It's a simple matter for me: I have no desire to watch 'Clarkson's Farm', so I don't, and therefore don't consider I am boycotting it by not watching.
> 
> If, however, Amazon trailed a forthcoming episode in which the serfs who labour on Clarkson's farmland unwisely disturb a Bronze Age round barrow, thus awaking from its 4,000-year sleep the shambling remains of a malevolent priest or shaman who then wreaked merciless revenge upon Clarkson, culminating in the odious twat evacuating his bowels live on TV while being impaled up the tradesmans by a rampaging horde of fly-agaric crazed wild boar... well, that would certainly appeal to me, and to decide _not_ to watch such a televisual spectacle, thus depriving myself of much viewing pleasure and self-education about prehistoric ritual practices - that would be a boycott.


I will not knowingly go near anything Amazon if I can possibly help it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

hash tag said:


> I will not knowingly go near anything Amazon if I can possibly help it.


But are you boycotting them?


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

hash tag said:


> I will not knowingly go near anything Amazon if I can possibly help it.


That is a proper boycott. My friend gave up amazon last year and he'd used it a lot until then, so it inconvenienced him significantly, sort of. Not watching jeremy  clarkson isn't like that at all.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> That is a proper boycott. My friend gave up amazon last year and he'd used it a lot until then, so it inconvenienced him significantly, sort of. Not watching jeremy  clarkson isn't like that at all.



There's no requirement of a boycott that you must be personally inconvenienced by abstaining from something.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2022)

Anyone buying his thing it was a reference to GoT? Not that this in any way makes it normal or balanced. Just seemed he came out with that after others suggested it for him on twitter.

It's disturbing and frankly weird either way of course.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I get what Bimble's saying. I think I'm the same. There are lots of things I'm interested in, but 'X investigates Y' isn't just about Y. It's about X's relation with Y. However much I may be interested in Y, I may not be interested at all in X's relation with Y.



Would you refuse to read an article about kendo because Henry Kissinger wrote it?


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2022)

I was boycotting Coke as in diet Coke, cos of their annti union shit, Mexcico etc, until I forgot I was boycotting them,


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Would you refuse to read an article about kendo because Henry Kissinger wrote it?


I did have a similar thought. If Clarckson somehow did a TV show about jodo, I would have to watch it. It wouldn't be to learn about jodo, though. It would be to stay abreast of the way jodo is being publicised. Bit different - it's more akin to a professional interest.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> There's no requirement of a boycott that you must be personally inconvenienced by abstaining from something.


I dunno, but ok. I am boycotting Jeremy Clarkson then, and aubergines.


----------



## tommers (Dec 19, 2022)

xenon said:


> Anyone buying his thing it was a reference to GoT? Not that this in any way makes it normal or balanced. Just seemed he came out with that after others suggested it for him on twitter.
> 
> It's disturbing and frankly weird either way of course.


Yeah of course it was.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> I dunno, but ok. I am boycotting Jeremy Clarkson then, and aubergines.



The difference of course, is that boycotts usually indicate that you find something or someone _morally_ objectionable.

Aubergines?


----------



## Santino (Dec 19, 2022)

xenon said:


> Anyone buying his thing it was a reference to GoT? Not that this in any way makes it normal or balanced. Just seemed he came out with that after others suggested it for him on twitter.
> 
> It's disturbing and frankly weird either way of course.


It was absolutely a reference to an incident that was originally in Game of Thrones.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

xenon said:


> Anyone buying his thing it was a reference to GoT? Not that this in any way makes it normal or balanced. Just seemed he came out with that after others suggested it for him on twitter.
> 
> It's disturbing and frankly weird either way of course.


No idea. But randomly bringing up Rose West or Nicola Sturgeon isn’t from Game of Thrones. That’s just misogyny with no pop culture pretensions.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2022)

Oh OK, I'm boycotting avacardos for environmental reasons... The fact I think they're rank is incidental.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> The difference of course, is that boycotts usually indicate that you find something or someone _morally_ objectionable.
> 
> Aubergines?


You’re thinking of avocados.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

xenon said:


> Oh OK, I'm boycotting avacardos for environmental reasons... The fact I think their rank is incidental.


Damn you!


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No idea. But randomly bringing up Rose West or Nicola Sturgeon isn’t from Game of Thrones. That’s just misogyny with no pop culture pretensions.



Ah yeah I'd forgotten. I hadn't actually read the article itself, just commentry then heard his oh dear, I'm terribly shocked shtick today.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> The difference of course, is that boycotts usually indicate that you find something or someone morally objectionable.


Oh right, "morally objectionable" is the requirement ? I never said that about him just that i think he's a dickhead so i'm not interested in spending my time consuming his creations.
I love loads of stuff that i think is 'morally objectionable' eg fried oysters and all sorts of songs who by their lyrics are definitely wronguns.


----------



## tommers (Dec 19, 2022)

xenon said:


> Oh OK, I'm boycotting avacardos for environmental reasons... The fact I think they're rank is incidental.


Of course you know who really likes avocadoes? The American, Megan Markle. 

Admittedly so does her majesty Katherine the Princess of Wales, but that's different.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2022)

Santino said:


> It was absolutely a reference to an incident that was originally in Game of Thrones.



With him as the High Sparrow I suppose.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Oh right, "morally objectionable" is the requirement ?



I think it's one of them. That doesn't mean you _have _to boycott everything you find morally objectionable. Just that you are in this case.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I think it's one of them. That doesn't mean you have to boycott everything you find morally objectionable. Just that you are in this case.


Maybe its more about how tolerant you are of people you think are dickheads, which i'm not particularly. I don't think its about morally objectionable.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> maybe its about how tolerant you are of people you think are dickheads, i'm not particularly.



Probably more about why you think they're dickheads.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Would you refuse to read an article about kendo because Henry Kissinger wrote it?


I think there's a better dilemma than that. If Clarkson, or someone from his production team, were to approach me to ask if I might be interested in participating in a programme about martial arts fronted by him, would I tell them to do one? There's a genuine cost to me involved there as no fucker has heard of the martial arts I do and we need new students!


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Probably more about why you think they're dickheads.


If it helps i'm not going to watch the meghan and harry show either, its lack of interest and an awareness that life's quite short, nothing more passionate than that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> The difference of course, is that boycotts usually indicate that you find something or someone _morally_ objectionable.
> 
> Aubergines?


Had some really nice stuffed aubergines the other day


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> If it helps i'm not going to watch the meghan and harry show either, its lack of interest and an awareness that life's quite short, nothing more passionate than that.



Yep. Completely different.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Had some really nice stuff aubergines the other day



Fried in miso, they're hard to beat.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 19, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think there's a better dilemma than that. If Clarkson, or someone from his production team, were to approach me to ask if I might be interested in participating in a programme about martial arts fronted by him, would I tell them to do one? There's a genuine cost to me involved there as no fucker has heard of the martial arts I do and we need new students!


I have a similar problem with my form of martial arts. I can't even find anyone to spar with around here. It's no fun being the only black belt in Ludo in North Wales.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Yep. Completely different.


no its not. I'd watch it if i was interested in what they had to say.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> no its not. I'd watch it if i was interested in what they had to say.



But you wouldn't watch anything with Clarkson, regardless of whether the subject interested you.


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> If, however, Amazon trailed a forthcoming episode in which the serfs who labour on Clarkson's farmland unwisely disturb a Bronze Age round barrow, thus awaking from its 4,000-year sleep the shambling remains of a malevolent priest or shaman who then wreaked merciless revenge upon Clarkson, culminating in the odious twat evacuating his bowels live on TV while being impaled up the tradesmans by a rampaging horde of fly-agaric crazed wild boar...


I'd watch this ^.


----------



## maomao (Dec 19, 2022)

I'd watch Clarkson if it was a programme about Clarkson being eaten alive by wolves. I'd keep the sound off till he started screaming though.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> But you wouldn't watch anything with Clarkson, regardless of whether the subject interested you.


Will let you know if that changes. Like if there's some amazing and humanity-impacting discovery and Jeremy Clarkson is the one man who exclusively gets the gig of breaking the news to us, i'll be there .


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Will let you know if that changes. Like if there's some amazing and humanity-impacting discovery and Jeremy Clarkson is the one man who exclusively gets the gig of breaking the news to us, i'll be there .



That shouldn't matter to you. He'll still be a dickhead.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> That shouldn't matter to you. He'll still be a dickhead.


No, you misunderstand: Im not boycotting him I just think he’s a dick so I’m choosing not to spend my time watching his irrelevant stuff. I watched Boris Johnson’s resignation speech but I won’t tune in to his upcoming tv show about his thoughts on Churchill or his appearance on love island or whatever.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Im not boycotting him I just think he’s a dick so I’m choosing not to spend my time watching his irrelevant stuff.



You think he's a dick because of the misogynist and racist bollocks he's spouted, and therefore you won't watch his stuff. That is boycotting him


----------



## spitfire (Dec 19, 2022)

I'm boycotting this thread.


----------



## spitfire (Dec 19, 2022)

Bugger.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> You think he's a dick because of the misogynist and racist bollocks he's spouted, and therefore you won't watch his stuff. That is boycotting him


yeah ok. you're probably right tbh, because i'd find it weird if somebody I met told me they enjoy his shows now after this article, i'd judge them for it.


----------



## maomao (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> You think he's a dick because of the misogynist and racist bollocks he's spouted, and therefore you won't watch his stuff. That is boycotting him


Boycotts are punitive, she doesn't seem to imagine she's causing him any harm or loss of business by not watching him.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

maomao said:


> Boycotts are punitive ...



Not necessarily on a personal level. A boycott can just indicate a moral disagreement. My dad used to boycott South African produce in the 70s, but doubt he thought he was bringing down Botha.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

By Spymaster's definition we're all boycotting a lot of stuff all day long without ever thinking about it but there's a tiny bit of truth in it though, if you turn it around like if you'd look down a bit at somebody else who enjoys that thing which you're just instinctively choosing not to consume because you find it gross (jeremy clarkson, designer handbags, the daily mail, whatever)  then that is a moral judgement going on. Its still not a boycott though its just making choices.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> By Spymaster's definition we're all boycotting a lot of stuff all day long without ever thinking about it but there's a tiny bit of truth in it though, if you turn it around like if you'd look down a bit at somebody else who enjoys that thing which you're just instinctively choosing not to consume because you find it gross (jeremy clarkson, designer handbags, the daily mail, whatever)  then that is a moral judgement going on.



No. You were almost there with post #1401, but now you're back to your original mistake!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Not necessarily on a personal level. A boycott can just indicate a moral disagreement. My dad used to boycott South African produce in the 70s, but doubt he thought he was bringing down Botha.


With that kind of boycott, you're taking part in a collective effort, no? Your dad boycotting SA produce didn't mean too much on its own, but if he was one of millions doing it, maintaining a united front, it became a powerful punitive measure.

One of the reasons the sporting/music boycotts were so effective is that they really hurt white South Africans. The rebel tours did massive damage by breaking the united front.


----------



## bimble (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> No. You were almost there with post #1401, but now you're back to your original mistake!


Am i still boycotting him now, after i tried to watch his show and just really didnt like it?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> With that kind of boycott, you're taking part in a collective effort, no? Your dad boycotting SA produce didn't mean too much on its own, but if he was one of millions doing it, maintaining a united front, it became a powerful punitive measure.



He didn't see it that way though, same as many others. He just didn't buy SA stuff because he thought they were dickheads. Same reason Bimble doesn't watch Clarkson.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> Am i still boycotting him now, after i tried to watch his show and just really didnt like it?



Of course. 

See post #1401.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 19, 2022)

bimble said:


> The intro, yes. First a montage of lots of dynamic manly shots of his previous life as a superstar carman and then the intro to the farm "nestled" so nestled amongst the Cotswolds, then something about tractors.
> He is in shot and talking the whole time, the writing is shit its his self centred monologue in his crappy voice so i just am not interested and i think thats ok. He wouldn't like me either.



This is the thing, his cocky bigotry is part of the show. It’s not something you can spilt out.

You can often bypass some of the worst aspects of actors or writers if they do a good role or work but not when the problematic aspect is part of and a foundation stone of what they are selling. 

I am genuinely interested in Clarksons Farm  as a series idea but I’m not touching it.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I've been thinking about this and can't say I boycot anyone's output because of their politics or views. If the subject matter interests me, I'll read or watch it regardless. The closest I get is not watching films with John Wayne or Jason Statham in them but that's because Wayne was a shit actor and Statham's films are all crap.


I do have a weakness for Wayne movies tbf , & have seen a few Statham movies that I did enjoy #donthateme


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)

I also don't boycott anyone. 
It is just that since the internet I watch very little TV, and am very discriminating about what I will watch.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 19, 2022)

since he’s a fan of old school of cruelty medieval public shaming, shouldn’t he do a stint in the docks or summat? I would make him perform footwork to a relentless set of jackhammering juke with ghettotech misandrist lyrics that objectify his nuts. Until he dies on the spot.


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 19, 2022)

Sick of the powerlessness the rest of us have against cunts like him. 

I hope he suffers and dies


----------



## scifisam (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> But you wouldn't watch anything with Clarkson, regardless of whether the subject interested you.



I won't watch things with Clarkson in, but it's not due to moral objections, it's because I find him really unpleasant to watch because he's not only a dickhead, he's a very obvious dickhead. Portillo is a right-wing twat but a weirdly good presenter - he hides his attitudes so well you can barely believe it's the same person - and I watch stuff with him in, but Clarkson's opinions and general dickishness are always on show. 

That's not a boycott, but it's also not the same as not watching F1 simply because it's not interesting to me.


----------



## Santino (Dec 19, 2022)

Can everyone boycott this argument now?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

scifisam said:


> Clarkson's opinions and general dickishness are always on show.



Not so. In the farm thing he's only a bit of a tit rather than a raging fuckwit.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think I’m very manly.  Which I’m fine with.



Not even when you're doing your raddled old poet voice?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 19, 2022)

8ball said:


> Not even when you're doing your raddled old poet voice?


I’m not “doing” that: it _is_ my voice!


----------



## belboid (Dec 19, 2022)

Comparing not watching some telly because you are sure you won't like it is completely and utterly different to refusing to buy South African goods or the ilk and only a fucking idiot would argue otherwise.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 19, 2022)

Santino said:


> Can everyone boycott this argument now?


what do you mean when you say 'boycott' though?


----------



## scifisam (Dec 19, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> Not so. In the farm thing he's only a bit of a tit rather than a raging fuckwit.



I did actually try it, but to me he still came across as just as twattish. And he does put me off Millionaire, which is otherwise the sort of show I'd watch. 

Jimmy Carr also has the combination of vile human out on show that means I don't watch 8 Out of Ten Cats Does Countdown despite it being virtually made for me. Have tried numerous times, but he's so awful.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 19, 2022)

belboid said:


> Comparing not watching some telly because you are sure you won't like it is completely and utterly different to refusing to buy South African goods or the ilk and only a fucking idiot would argue otherwise.



It would be if anyone was doing that.


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2022)

klang said:


> sure, even when not referencing the bible


Be better if you didn't mention revered texts JC is not the messiah he's a very naughty boy


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m not “doing” that: it _is_ my voice!



So you're always doing it, then.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 19, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I love socialising. I just hate gambling. It’s boring. It gets in the way of socialising.


Forget the gambling aspect. You don't have to gamble to play cards. When on holiday (or at home) one of the greatest ways to relax is reading. But that's definitely anti-social. Cards is a relaxing pastime to have with others. Gin Rummy is perfect for it.


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> wait, is Jason Statham a wrong 'un??


I do know there was a window when everyone from lock stock was in town and had a reunion...and he was the only no show.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2022)

gosub said:


> I do know there was a window when everyone from lock stock was in town and had a reunion...and he was the only no show.


surely a mark in his favour


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> surely a mark in his favour


I'd go through other way...you not be who you were but shunning your past never a great look


----------



## Elpenor (Dec 19, 2022)

two sheds said:


> what do you mean when you say 'boycott' though?



It usually entails frequently posting on the thread


----------



## two sheds (Dec 19, 2022)

I'm not sure that's boycotting though, it might just be someone who's interested in a relentless wanker.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 19, 2022)

two sheds said:


> what do you mean when you say 'boycott' though?



40 for no wicket at lunch on the first day?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 19, 2022)

_The Relentless Wanker_ would be a good magazine title.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Forget the gambling aspect. You don't have to gamble to play cards. When on holiday (or at home) one of the greatest ways to relax is reading. But that's definitely anti-social. Cards is a relaxing pastime to have with others. Gin Rummy is perfect for it.



Gin Rummy is one of the few card games I'll play aside from the main one (for which some kind of stake is pretty much required).
Contract Whist and Shithead are also fun.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2022)

I will play racing demon, not for money because the people I play it with are all way faster than me and sometimes they cheat.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Dec 19, 2022)

Sue said:


> Not sure I'd call it 'unedifying'. He assaulted someone at work. Surely more like 'criminal' or 'disgraceful' or 'completely unacceptable?
> 
> (Can't remember if he got done for it or not but he should've been.)


Point taken. Agreed. Although could be said to be all of the above.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 20, 2022)

Shithead is a good timewaster. Plays a bit like Uno. Clarkeson falls into the category of arsehole I'll live to see float by me on the river.


----------



## killer b (Dec 20, 2022)

Just encountered this very funny Victor Lewis Smith fake obit for him


----------



## tim (Dec 20, 2022)

Orang Utan said:


> since he’s a fan of old school of cruelty medieval public shaming, shouldn’t he do a stint in the docks or summat? I would make him perform footwork to a relentless set of jackhammering juke with ghettotech misandrist lyrics that objectify his nuts. Until he dies on the spot.



Yes, Execution Dock.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 20, 2022)

marty21 said:


> I do have a weakness for Wayne movies tbf , & have seen a few Statham movies that I did enjoy #donthateme



I don't watch Clint Eastwood movies because he's an NRA weirdo but also because he cannot act at all.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 20, 2022)

He doesn't talk much in them though, and is admittedly better in the later films where he doesn't talk at all. 

I can't watch Cruise in anything because you can always see under the bravado surface there's an empty lunatic sofa-jumping xenu apostle.


----------



## killer b (Dec 20, 2022)

I didn't used to watch Cruise films for those kinds of reasons but Mrs B is a fan so I do now and it turns out actually he mostly makes really good action movies


----------



## two sheds (Dec 20, 2022)

.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 20, 2022)

How does this relate to Clarkson though?


----------



## two sheds (Dec 20, 2022)

It's all about Yorkshire cricketers  - keep up


----------



## killer b (Dec 20, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> How does this relate to Clarkson though?


I dunno, I guess there's threads where it's necessary to maintain a tight focus on the thread topic, but one where we're all just slagging off Jeremy Clarkson probably isn't one of them


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 21, 2022)

source


----------



## likesfish (Dec 22, 2022)

he's a cunt but the sun editors decided that column was acceptable


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 22, 2022)

likesfish said:


> he's a cunt but the sun editors decided that column was acceptable


speaking of which, I see Kelvin MacCunt has outdone himself. 

Hopefully he'll have a shit Christmass and choke to death on some port


----------



## Ming (Dec 23, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> speaking of which, I see Kelvin MacCunt has outdone himself.
> 
> Hopefully he'll have a shit Christmass and choke to death on some port


Never admitted The Truth headline was a complete lie. Even now.


----------



## Karl Masks (Dec 23, 2022)

Ming said:


> Never admitted The Truth headline was a complete lie. Even now.


He's a thug. An utter bully and I wish nothing but the worst on him.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

If only Prince Andrew made good TV. I bet he'd be shit at farming too 

Can't watch 'Clarkson' because seeing someone on screen who you want to endlessly punch isn't relaxing. Gordon Ramsay can fall down a well too.


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 23, 2022)

ska invita said:


> If only Prince Andrew made good TV. I bet he'd be shit at farming too
> 
> Can't watch 'Clarkson' because seeing someone on screen who you want to endlessly punch isn't relaxing. Gordon Ramsay can fall down a well too.


‘Celebrity Twat Well Plummet’
‘Celebrity Downfall’
‘I’ve Been Flung Down This Well, Get Me Out Of Here’

I’d watch any of these


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> ‘Celebrity Twat Well Plummet’
> ‘Celebrity Downfall’
> ‘I’ve Been Flung Down This Well, Get Me Out Of Here’
> 
> I’d watch any of these


i guess theyve tried this with Get Me Out of Here, but you cant even enjoy Jim davidson being tortured as he won the thing


----------



## gosub (Dec 23, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> ‘Celebrity Twat Well Plummet’
> ‘Celebrity Downfall’
> ‘I’ve Been Flung Down This Well, Get Me Out Of Here’
> 
> I’d watch any of these


Think I'd rather  I'm stuck in this well, don't you know who I am?, rather than get me out of here though I'd lie about watching either if it'll help get it commissioned


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 23, 2022)

ska invita said:


> If only Prince Andrew made good TV. I bet he'd be shit at farming too
> 
> Can't watch 'Clarkson' because seeing someone on screen who you want to endlessly punch isn't relaxing. Gordon Ramsay can fall down a well too.


To be fair, my brother worked on the 'Shark fin' documentary for C4 a few years ago and Ramsay isnt as much of a cunt as he is on telly, and tbf all everyone does on telly is act.

However writing shit for the sun as clarkson has done is a bit different.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

ruffneck23 said:


> To be fair, my brother worked on the 'Shark fin' documentary for C4 a few years ago and isnt as much of a cunt as he is on telly, and tbf all everyone does on telly is act.
> 
> However writing shit for the sun as clarkson has done is a bit different.


One of his shows Gordon Fuckface did a vegetarian special with 4 members of the veggie public - he then hid some ham under the cheese, asked them if they liked it, they did, and then went HAH! You ate ham! Id have flykicked him
His A REAL MAN SHOUTS AGGRESIVELY A LOT AT PEOPLE shtick has probably inspired many a cunt manager to be even more of cunt <i fucking him despise him and wish him pain


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 23, 2022)

ska invita said:


> One of his shows Gordon Fuckface did a vegetarian special with 4 members of the veggie public - he then hid some ham under the cheese, asked them if they liked it, they did, and then went HAH! You ate ham! Id have flykicked him
> His A REAL MAN SHOUTS AGGRESIVELY A LOT AT PEOPLE shtick has probably inspired many a cunt manager to be even more of cunt <i fucking him despise him and wish him pain


Fair enough.. That is cunty.

Back to Cuntson?


----------



## pesh (Dec 23, 2022)

ska invita said:


> One of his shows Gordon Fuckface did a vegetarian special with 4 members of the veggie public - he then hid some ham under the cheese, asked them if they liked it, they did, and then went HAH! You ate ham! Id have flykicked him
> His A REAL MAN SHOUTS AGGRESIVELY A LOT AT PEOPLE shtick has probably inspired many a cunt manager to be even more of cunt <i fucking him despise him and wish him pain


Someone needs to make him an LSD lasagna. 
That would be good telly.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

pesh said:


> Someone needs to make him an LSD lasagna.
> That would be good telly.


LSD Lasagne, great series concept . I'm in


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 23, 2022)

pesh said:


> Someone needs to make him an LSD lasagna.
> That would be good telly.


It could be called Lasambush, and trick a different celebrity every week.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

My Big Fat LSD Lasagne.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 23, 2022)

Ramsay's Acid Nightmares


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2022)

Maybe one of those farm lads could accidentally inject Clarkson with some horse tranx


----------



## scalyboy (Dec 23, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Maybe one of those farm lads could accidentally inject Clarkson with some horse tranx


Klarkson In The K-Hole
(or is PCP the horse tranquilliser? I always forget... )
TBH my failing memory is a cause for concern at the best of times, but Xmas is just about the worst time to get my dissociatives, hallucinogens and other nostrums muddled up, what with buying presents and all.. 
Nan is a veteran caner (has been from the 1950s onwards), so she never says no to a dabble of the old Day-Glo / fluorescent Xmas pud, but auntie Jean can't stand mind expansion and would much prefer a glass of Amontillado and a generous spoonful of Bolivia's finest, sprinkled on top of a Mr Kiplings


----------



## belboid (Dec 23, 2022)

The oven would be too hot, it would destroy any potency.  

You could inject it while it’s cooling for ten minutes, I suppose.


----------



## maomao (Dec 23, 2022)

I think it's immensely cruel to want to send anyone on a bad trip and then watch it for pleasure. LSD is a sacred drug and even a bad trip can be a learning experience. We should just inject the cunt with bleach instead. That would be even better tv.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Dec 23, 2022)

A bad trip is as rough as fuck tbh.


----------



## Elpenor (Dec 23, 2022)

scalyboy said:


> Klarkson In The K-Hole
> (or is PCP the horse tranquilliser? I always forget... )
> TBH my failing memory is a cause for concern at the best of times, but Xmas is just about the worst time to get my dissociatives, hallucinogens and other nostrums muddled up, what with buying presents and all..
> Nan is a veteran caner (has been from the 1950s onwards), so she never says no to a dabble of the old Day-Glo / fluorescent Xmas pud, but auntie Jean can't stand mind expansion and would much prefer a glass of Amontillado and a generous spoonful of Bolivia's finest, sprinkled on top of a Mr Kiplings


Lol at the Amontillado, my Grandparents’ favourite


----------



## T & P (Dec 23, 2022)

Never mind bad drug trips. Nothing would be more soul-destroying to Clarkson than a year ban from driving or being driven by others in any kind of vehicle. Only allowed to use a bicycle for local journeys, and trains or coaches for longer distance trips.


----------



## pogofish (Dec 23, 2022)

Voley said:


> I got the reference. Doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. Fucking prick.


Same here - but GOT put it in the context of a rising and controlling religion tightening its grip on even the most powerful. Which is something Clarkson didn't..!


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 23, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> Ramsay's Acid Nightmares


I'm not sure if I've ever knowingly watched an episode of his show, but I have a great fondness for the Ramsey gremlin post:


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 23, 2022)

hitmouse said:


>



I've read that several times and still can't make head nor tail of it.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 23, 2022)

What I don't understand is why Clarkson even had an opinion on Meghan let alone a hate for her. She seems a wholly innocent person to me, unless he is a rabid royalist and dislikes that Harry has been tempted to the USA by Meghan but even so, "hate" seems a vast over reaction and what Harry does is surely Harry's business, he is after all an adult.

If by including the Game of Thrones reference he expected people to laugh then firstly he over estimated by about a million times how many people would get the GoT reference. My son got it, me I had no clue, and coming so soon after he expressed total hatred it seems the majority of people would imagine it was a deviant fantasy from a nasty fantasist. 

His apology wasn't an apology and his column received more complaints than any other item in 2022. I don't believe in the theory that any publicity is good publicity, interesting that this article could as easily have come from Piers Morgan, someone Clarkson is said to hate. Personally I hope the article loses him jobs and causes him to reflect properly on the asshole he is.


----------



## killer b (Dec 23, 2022)

Yossarian said:


> Ramsay's Acid Nightmares


reminded of this great slot on This Morning with Richard Not Judy, where they test the lazy journalist cliche 'Lee Evans is like Norman Wisdom on Acid'


----------



## killer b (Dec 23, 2022)

weltweit said:


> me I had no clue


no way


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 23, 2022)

Spymaster said:


> I've read that several times and still can't make head nor tail of it.


I believe the original poster made a typo and wrote "looking" where they meant to write "look", does that help?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 23, 2022)

killer b said:


> no way


I don't even know what outlet GoT was on .. haven't been tempted to find out..


----------



## Ground Elder (Dec 23, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> I believe the original poster made a typo and wrote "looking" where they meant to write "look", does that help?


That's the first line sorted. Keep going


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 23, 2022)

The bit in brackets acts as a stage direction or the voice of an omnipresent narrator, the rest is Ramsey's dialogue. I don't know why people are so confused by Ramsey's reaction to seeing a little ghoulie eating a rotten cucumber?


----------

