Jeremy Clarkson unhinged

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Thanks for the clarification. Surely though that just underlines that the people who were actually outraged by the writing are correct in your view.

Yes I think it is correct to be outraged, point out the problems with the article because of the issue of violence against women. I think I was both - I felt it was pretty outrageous hyperbole as some people would take it as encouragement to hate. I also saw that it is what Clarkson is paid for presumably and what some people expect and want and are entertained by, and Clarkson needs to pay his overheads by giving the public what they want as much as the Sussexes, with their hyperbole about racism. It's not exactly surprising to the Sussexes presumably, that like Princess Diana and other public figures, if you try to use the media you make yourself a target in the process. Hence, probably why people like Charles and William are trying not to give the media what they want by getting into a public tit for tat.

So if we have the article, plus the outrage, and the conversation about violence and the non-apology apology, it seems to meet the needs of lots of different sections of society, including the economic needs of the media and Harry, Meghan and Jeremy. 

 

[Nearly Sane]

Yes I think it is correct to be outraged, point out the problems with the article because of the issue of violence against women. I think I was both - I felt it was pretty outrageous hyperbole as some people would take it as encouragement to hate. I also saw that it is what Clarkson is paid for presumably and what some people expect and want and are entertained by, and Clarkson needs to pay his overheads by giving the public what they want as much as the Sussexes, with their hyperbole about racism. It's not exactly surprising to the Sussexes presumably, that like Princess Diana and other public figures, if you try to use the media you make yourself a target in the process. Hence, probably why people like Charles and William are trying not to give the media what they want by getting into a public tit for tat.

So if we have the article, plus the outrage, and the conversation about violence and the non-apology apology, it seems to meet the needs of lots of different sections of society, including the economic needs of the media and Harry, Meghan and Jeremy.

That seems to be saying 'isn't it great that Jeremy Clarkson wrote a dangerous piece of misogyny that may encourage some people to violently attack women because it creates conversation about violence against women'?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

That seems to be saying 'isn't it great that Jeremy Clarkson wrote a dangerous piece of misogyny that may encourage some people to violently attack women because it creates conversation about violence against women'?

I'm neither saying it's great or bad that he wrote it. I am saying  it is good that there are people pointing out what articles like this might lead to and why the article is problematic. And I think it's good that we don't have censorship preventing articles like this being written.

I'm saying people will write stuff like this because there is still an appetite for it - it's a form of satire that some people appreciate. Lots of people were outraged by some of the sexist violence in Spitting Image but it was also a very popular show. And there are still people today who will appreciate it, despite the lunatic humour that would be considered by many sections of society as unacceptable. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/oct/01/spitting-image-satire-ian-hislop-roy-hattersley

[Nearly Sane]

I'm neither saying it's great or bad that he wrote it. I am saying  it is good that there are people pointing out what articles like this might lead to and why the article is problematic. And I think it's good that we don't have censorship preventing articles like this being written.

I'm saying people will write stuff like this because there is still an appetite for it - it's a form of satire that some people appreciate. Lots of people were outraged by some of the sexist violence in Spitting Image but it was also a very popular show. And there are still people today who will appreciate it, despite the lunatic humour that would be considered by many sections of society as unacceptable. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/oct/01/spitting-image-satire-ian-hislop-roy-hattersley

If the article is in your view 'problematic' then you are saying it is bad.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

If the article is in your view 'probelematic' then you are saying it is bad.

I found parts of it bad and parts of it funny. I wouldn't say the whole article was bad. And even though I think the GoT reference was problematic, my view of how problematic it was changed once I had read the rest of the article and one of his other articles and realised this hyperbole was part of his USP and why he gets paid by the Sun to write.   

I can think of plenty of criticisms I would make about Meghan and Harry but I wouldn't use the Walk of Shame reference to do it because I didn't enjoy the scene in GoT and think a lot of scenes in GoT are exploitative of women.

[Nearly Sane]

I found parts of it bad and parts of it funny. I wouldn't say the whole article was bad. And even though I think the GoT reference was problematic, my view of how problematic it was changed once I had read the rest of the article and one of his other articles and realised this hyperbole was part of his USP and why he gets paid by the Sun to write.   

I can think of plenty of criticisms I would make about Meghan and Harry but I wouldn't use the Walk of Shame reference to do it because I didn't enjoy the scene in GoT and think a lot of scenes in GoT are exploitative of women.

You said the article was problematic

[Nearly Sane]

https://twitter.com/polblonde/status/1604913142810771471?t=bCABJhF6E9EhysEtlkc_gQ&s=19

[Gordon]

I suspect that Clarkson has long since worked out that for him noteriety = dosh, and behaves accordingly.

[Nearly Sane]

I suspect that Clarkson has long since worked out that for him noteriety = dosh, and behaves accordingly.

Oh indeed. He doesn't care about the impact beyond his wallet, and knows that The Sun will pay him for misogyny.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

You said the article was problematic

Yes - by which I meant that I can see problems with some of things the article said.

It's just an observation that parts of the article troubled me. I am glad I felt uncomfortable with parts of it. And on an intellectual level I am glad I can recognise the problem the article presents in the context of misogyny.

I am also glad that I felt uncomfortable by many of the scenes in GoT, which seemed to exploit women or were particularly gratuitously violent towards men, while also finding myself drawn into the story and characters to the extent that I watched the whole series and fast forwarded the bits that grossed me out.

I like myself better for feeling troubled by the article and GoT, and am a bit worried by those who don't feel a bit uncomfortable, while also feeling glad there are people who feel less of the yuck factor or are less sensitive than I am. I find such less sensitive people suddenly become very useful to me when I am grossed out by situations in real life and can't do something and they seem unfazed or able to tolerate the grossness better. So if some people are not troubled by Jeremy's article and just find it funny, I am ok with that so long as they don't go around physically hurting women.

I am guessing if I read some more of Jeremy's articles, which is unlikely, I would find he has said a lot of problematic things on all kinds of topics. His act seems to be to come across as unhinged. I read he repeatedly punched Piers Morgan and on another occasion dropped water into Piers' lap on a flight they were both on, so it looked like Piers had wet himself. Not really coming across as the actions of a mature, well-balanced person.

ETA - So for example, the whole Meghan being paraded around naked with excrement thrown at her was gross and problematic because I found it gross and problematic when I saw it on GoT, though I understood that it was depicting something that might have happened in the time GoT was set as it's apparently based on Medieval history, when people were more vile and cruel to each other. Whereas the idea of Jeremy unable to sleep and grinding his teeth because he hates Meghan was not problematic as I find it very unlikely that Jeremy can't sleep at night and grinds his teeth because he hates Meghan so much, so I didn't take it seriously.

Nor did I take seriously that he hates Meghan more than Rose West. I wonder how many names and edits of his article he went through before he settled on Rose West for maximum shock value.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes - by which I meant that I can see problems with some of things the article said.

It's just an observation that parts of the article troubled me. I am glad I felt uncomfortable with parts of it. And on an intellectual level I am glad I can recognise the problem the article presents in the context of misogyny.

I am also glad that I felt uncomfortable by many of the scenes in GoT, which seemed to exploit women or were particularly gratuitously violent towards men, while also finding myself drawn into the story and characters to the extent that I watched the whole series and fast forwarded the bits that grossed me out.

I like myself better for feeling troubled by the article and GoT, and am a bit worried by those who don't feel a bit uncomfortable, while also feeling glad there are people who feel less of the yuck factor or are less sensitive than I am. I find such less sensitive people suddenly become very useful to me when I am grossed out by situations in real life and can't do something and they seem unfazed or able to tolerate the grossness better. So if some people are not troubled by Jeremy's article and just find it funny, I am ok with that so long as they don't go around physically hurting women.

I am guessing if I read some more of Jeremy's articles, which is unlikely, I would find he has said a lot of problematic things on all kinds of topics. His act seems to be to come across as unhinged. I read he repeatedly punched Piers Morgan and on another occasion dropped water into Piers' lap on a flight they were both on, so it looked like Piers had wet himself. Not really coming across as the actions of a mature, well-balanced person.

ETA - So for example, the whole Meghan being paraded around naked with excrement thrown at Meghan was gross and problematic because I found it gross and problematic when I saw it on GoT, though I understood that it was depicting something that might have happened in the time GoT was set as it's apparently based on Medieval history, when people were more vile and cruel to each other. Whereas the idea of Jeremy unable to sleep and grinding his teeth because he hates Meghan was not problematic as I find it very unlikely that Jeremy can't sleep at night and grinds his teeth because he hates Meghan so much, so I didn't take it seriously.

So you're glad of misogyny because it makes you think of misogyny...

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

So you're glad of misogyny because it makes you think of misogyny...

Wouldn't say I'm glad of it. How long do you want to keep going with this because we both know I don't think like you, am not going to agree with your conclusions and don't want to? But we can just keep going round and round if you're enjoying yourself here.

[Nearly Sane]

Wouldn't say I'm glad of it. How long do you want to keep going with this because we both know I don't think like you, am not going to agree with your conclusions and don't want to? But we can just keep going round and round if you're enjoying yourself here.

And yet I only pointed out what you said

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

And yet I only pointed out what you said

Providing evidence of your assertions is useful if you want them taken seriously. Please quote where I said I was glad of misogyny.