Jeremy Clarkson in the mire?

Of course it’s about intent or not. But the intent has to be wilful and malicious. Not accidental, not ironic and not playful. Which is precisely why the whole argument is a mockery.

The judgement can only ever be subjective so we end up with the existing situation where the very mention of an “unmentionable” word produces righteous indignation and cyber hysteria against the perpetrator. And I would suggest that anyone taking offense at the hearing of a word in a song or a film or reading it, is simply taking advantage of the situation.

Absolutely. Couldn’t agree more.

This somewhat reminds me of the guy that reported his neighbours to the police for having wildly enthusiastic sex with the lights on and their curtains left open. The visiting policeman, having looked out from the complainant’s house points out that it isn’t actually possible to see the into neighbours’ bedroom window, to which the response is “Well you have to climb on that wardrobe first, you’ll find the binoculars up there”

Hey, when I posted that you deleted it because of the younger element we (apparently) get here…;o)

No, you aren’t; you’re indulging in your usual school playground yah-boo tactics of trying to get others to lose their tempers. FAIL (that’s why I deleted previous posts, since I won’t play to your tune); come back, and try again, when you’ve achieved proper adulthood.

I am not sure what you think you are talking about – I repeated most of each of your post in my replies…doing the same now just in case you decide to run off with your ‘toys’ again.

And I thought we were discussing – I said the ‘n’ word was offensive, and you wanted to reclaim it for paint charts and printers inks, etc. Now you are going on about the name chosen by the novelty act that won Eurovision and claiming I’m trying to get you to lose your temper. Personally (and I don’t care how you feel about it) I think you did lose your temper and that was why you threw your teddy out of the pram – but you lost that plot and came back again.

Now please play nicely.

So the N word is unacceptable these days. What about the term “Darkie”. It is common for many black people to call white people “Whitie” Sauce for the goose ,,,,,,,,,,,

Perhaps the Government could start a well paid quango into acceptable terms?

Just trying to understand, to make things clear…

No, you aren’t; you’re indulging in your usual school playground yah-boo tactics of trying to get others to lose their tempers. FAIL (that’s why I deleted previous posts, since I won’t play to your tune); come back, and try again, when you’ve achieved proper adulthood.

His “forename” has apparently assumed a new meaning (and I needed somebody, on another forum, to tell me this.)

This somewhat reminds me of the guy that reported his neighbours to the police for having wildly enthusiastic sex with the lights on and their curtains left open. The visiting policeman, having looked out from the complainant’s house points out that it isn’t actually possible to see the into neighbours’ bedroom window, to which the response is “Well you have to climb on that wardrobe first, you’ll find the binoculars up there”

All this (manufactured) righteous indignation …..

:rolleyes:

Moggy

And he might not; please be good enough not to put your spin onto what I’ve said.

Just trying to understand, to make things clear…

I can’t explain this in one-syllable words, so will have to hope that you can keep up.

Oh, you are pushing it. Why not try using three words instead of one to make your missives even more confusing?

I couldn’t care less what that “artist” looks like, wears, or how he behaves, since I gave up on that show years ago; my “gripe” (as you so charmingly put it) is about the deliberate juxtaposition of two words, in his stage name, which together are an obscenity.

Nope. Try making it even harder.

Apparently it has acquired a new meaning (just like “gay” and “the n-word”,) and my “knowledge” comes from being able to read the internet dictionaries. So, you see (though I very much doubt it) the “Austrian bearded woman” (actually a man) is not “my obscenity”; my objection is to his name, AND THAT IS ALL.

Really? I doubt it too.

It must be your dirty mind making it obscene…

I’m having some difficulty understanding your objection to her name.

Well, there’s your problem! She is not a she! Do keep up…;o)

Were you similarly riled when Conchita Martínez was a star on the professional tennis circuit? After all, here’s a lady’s small part juxtaposed with the nose of some male person called Martin.

But were internet dictionaries around at the time? It would make it difficult for Edgar to find it obscene otherwise.

Sounds rude to me.. know what I mean? Nudge.. Nudge..

No, please don’t wind him up like that!

His “forename” has apparently assumed a new meaning (and I needed somebody, on another forum, to tell me this.) Had it stopped there, I wouldn’t have had a problem, but add the “surname,” and the two words take on a whole new connotation.

You needed somebody to point out how obscene his/her name was so that you could come back here to complain about it? Are you going to complain to anyone else, or are we the only ones so blessed…?
Does this work in Austrian, or only English?

Just as I feel sorry for a former work colleague, whose Christian name is Gay, I have sympathy with Miss (unless she is now married) Martinez, who has had her Christian name hijacked (apparently.)

Why, what does it say about you that you always assume everyone’s mind is as filthy as yours…?

Material, which is obviously designed to be offensive, leaves me cold; I was never able to watch Kenny Everett, in front of my mother, because of his “Cupid Stunt” character.

But surely everything she did was always in the best possibly taste…?
It took a while for me to get Sid Snot’s apology for arriving late because his (he’s!) piston broke… Mind you, I was young at the time.

His “forename” has apparently assumed a new meaning (and I needed somebody, on another forum, to tell me this.) Had it stopped there, I wouldn’t have had a problem, but add the “surname,” and the two words take on a whole new connotation.
Just as I feel sorry for a former work colleague, whose Christian name is Gay, I have sympathy with Miss (unless she is now married) Martinez, who has had her Christian name hijacked (apparently.)
Material, which is obviously designed to be offensive, leaves me cold; I was never able to watch Kenny Everett, in front of my mother, because of his “Cupid Stunt” character.

I’m having some difficulty understanding your objection to her name.

Were you similarly riled when Conchita Martínez was a star on the professional tennis circuit? After all, here’s a lady’s small part juxtaposed with the nose of some male person called Martin.

Sounds rude to me.. know what I mean? Nudge.. Nudge..

Moggy

Me too, but Edgar Brooks – he who deleted several of his earlier posts – has come in and posted his message for all to read; feel free to read it and figure out what his message is.
(Hint: he might be saying that it is fine to use the ‘n’ word if the BBC can broadcast an obscene event like the Eurovision Song Contest with its winning bearded lady blah blah blah. Possibly he likes the ‘n’ word, doesn’t like men in drag…)

And he might not; please be good enough not to put your spin onto what I’ve said.
I can’t explain this in one-syllable words, so will have to hope that you can keep up.
I couldn’t care less what that “artist” looks like, wears, or how he behaves, since I gave up on that show years ago; my “gripe” (as you so charmingly put it) is about the deliberate juxtaposition of two words, in his stage name, which together are an obscenity.

Well, literal meaning is ‘little seashell’, but I bow to your knowledge about such things.

Apparently it has acquired a new meaning (just like “gay” and “the n-word”,) and my “knowledge” comes from being able to read the internet dictionaries. So, you see (though I very much doubt it) the “Austrian bearded woman” (actually a man) is not “my obscenity”; my objection is to his name, AND THAT IS ALL.

I thought this was about Clarkson…

Me too, but Edgar Brooks – he who deleted several of his earlier posts – has come in and posted his message for all to read; feel free to read it and figure out what his message is.

(Hint: he might be saying that it is fine to use the ‘n’ word if the BBC can broadcast an obscene event like the Eurovision Song Contest with its winning bearded lady blah blah blah. Possibly he likes the ‘n’ word, doesn’t like men in drag…)

I thought this was about Clarkson……don’t know anything about bearded women or even unbearded women on Eurovision, I’m afraid. A programme I gave up on about 20 years ago….

Depending on which alleged obscenity you refer to, it was never actually broadcast.

Keep up Charlie – the Eurovision winning Austrian bearded woman is Edgar’s obscenity, and it was broadcast. That was his gripe.

Depending on which alleged obscenity you refer to, it was never actually broadcast.

I’m rather pleased that the BBC broadcast the ‘obscenity’ before the watershed – allowing children the opportunity to watch will hopefully see them growing up a little more tolerant and understanding than previous generations seem to have judging by some of the comments on this thread.

He could always get sponsorship on his jeans…

…Conchita = “little c—” (that four-letter word snafu will never use,)…

Well, literal meaning is ‘little seashell’, but I bow to your knowledge about such things.

Indeed so – in fact I believe they have lived apart for 2 or 3 years, although maintaining their business relationship. Sounds a fair deal since she has been instrumental in managing the success of his career over the past decade or more.

We might yet see the Clarkson one-man show “Clarkson on Tour ” (or replace with your own favoured title!!:D) to help make ends meet.

In answer to the question posed by the title

Yes he is.

The long-suffering Mrs Clarkson has just filed for divorce and is looking for £15 million

Moggy

Filed them in April. But don’t say too much, he has a wonderful sense of injunction…

Oh hello again Edgar.

Is it worth anyone replying to your posts on the off chance that you just delete them all again?

If you’re going to remove intent from the equation, you’d better get some extra prisons built sharpish, since anyone seen carrying home a pick-axe handle (with the intention of repairing the tool in his garden shed,) or a baseball bat (for his kids to play with,) will be imprisoned for carrying an offensive weapon.

Or shot down in the street for having an accent and a table leg in a plastic bag? See the case of Harry Stanley. (I’d put a link, but I know you won’t bother to check yourself so why waste my time?)

All this (manufactured) righteous indignation over something that was never intended for viewing, by someone who has an exaggerated idea of how funny he is, plus seeing a man hounded from his job, and driven into illness, because he didn’t know the words of an 80+-year-old record (did anyone before the [single] complaint came in?) becomes even more ludicrous, when one realises that the BBC (that bastion of the upkeep of public morality,) has, along with the whole European TV system, been well-and-truly conned into broadcasting a total obscenity throughout the whole of Saturday night.

Ok, Brooksy. Name the obscenity, go on, expose your prejudice to the world once more…

Take the name of that creature that was manipulated (by a completely discredited “voting” system) into winning, and look at it carefully; Conchita = “little c—” (that four-letter word snafu will never use,) and Wurst is a sausage, yet the BBC was happy to broadcast it before the so-called “watershed,” and continued the “joke,” on The One Show last night.

Bravo, you’ve broken through that wall of intolerance and all will now return to normal!

Ok, it won’t. The monstrosity that is the Eurovision Song Contest was still won by an ‘obscenity’ (who is actually a comedy act in his/her home country, Austria) by a voting system that is ‘discredited’ (despite having just been updated so that the Eastern European states couldn’t vote for their neighbours anymore) and happily broadcast before the watershed by the BBC; erm, wait – when is the watershed on the BBC on a Saturday night? Surely these are things that you could have looked up yourself rather than splash it all over a post that you will almost certainly delete shortly anyway?
Is it men in dresses you don’t like, or bearded ladies? Singing bearded ladies, or men in dresses on your TV singing songs in a style that wouldn’t be out of place as a Bond theme tune and winning Europe-wide contests? How do you feel about the 1998 winner, the trans gender Dana International – did you whine about her being an obscenity too?

Naturally we can expect those wishing to clean the English language of all words which sully it, to take up this particular baton “and run with it,” though I admit to not holding my breath.

Moggy asked us to play nicely and I expected more of you than calling another human being an obscenity, but to expect any form of contrition over it would be futile, so I won’t hold my breath either.

In answer to the question posed by the title

Yes he is.

The long-suffering Mrs Clarkson has just filed for divorce and is looking for £15 million

Moggy

No idea……I don’t care and it is no longer even relevant because judgment has been handed down.

When? Was it handed down between your post yesterday afternoon and this morning, when you decided it was no longer relevant?
I am eager to learn…

And surely you know whether Clarkson’s use of the ‘n’ word was accidental, ironic, and playful, since you said it…