It's all about context I suppose, Elvis Costello is using the word in a totally different context. You hear that song quite a bit on R2. I've never heard the N word bleeped out.
Calling women Bitches and Hos is just as offensive if you think about it. There's a double standard operating somewhere...
Marmitee rag in double standards shocker. He didnt "recite a racist version of a childrens nursery rhyme"; he recited the original version of a childrens nursery rhyme. Storm in a tea-cup - New book coming soon. Simple
I vote we bring back the Swaztika - after all it was used heavily before those pesky Nazi's got hold of it
on this subject the Kiss logo was banned in Germany due to the ss being a bit nazi? they have a different logo there. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=k...kOtr8gZgJ&ved=0CC0QsAQ&biw=1360&bih=643&dpr=1
it's around now someone drags out the steven fry quote about being insulted, i agree though at the end of the day it's all words but the majority state it's unacceptable so hey ho.
He hardly brought it back; he recited a popular rhyme from back in the day. Having watched the video it all looks like a blatant set-up to me anyway. If the Swaztika was used now in the same context as before it got taken over by the Nazis I'd have no problem with it personally. What should we do next, ban the St George's Cross?
the problem is, it was just that "back in the day" when we knew no better i guess? i remember vividly being able to get paint in "n.... brown" or at least it being acceptable to call it that!
I guess its the same as a lot of subjects. Some people love being offended on behalf of others. Anyway, I'm out; this thread is bound to go Pete Tong and I for one can do without a million pm's giving me Marmitee for daring to have an opinion. Laters!
i agree, i didn't start it as a discussion on the right or wrong of word useage moreso to say clarkson was a tool...... i'm happy if it gets pulled if it's gonna go over to talking about the word itself as i don't wanna seem to be stirring it.
films are fiction, you choose to watch them it's all about context i guess, clarkson being a bbc employee must set standards?
You put the words 'Jeremy Clarkson' in where I used the word 'I' - in which case what you say is relevant. But I didn't use the words Jeremy Clarkson. Dealing with facts - if someone who works in the media all his life is stupid enough to repeat a 'popular' rhyme (and if we mean by popular everyone knows it, rather than actually uses it, bit like woodchip wallpaper is popular then) then he's asking for trouble - a bit like the hilarious 'slope' comment a few weeks before, then yes, he should know better. As for knocking people for having an opinion - I haven't done that. Everyone has a right to privacy and their own thoughts - the press has done its job in reporting what happened and you draw your own conclusions, just as I have done. I do think that having full access to education, libraries and media should actually compel us to aim higher - my point is citing what was done in the past is not a defence for ignoring the bloody obvious now.
For the record - I think his apology is extremely reasonable and sincere - not 'begging' as the papers are now saying. We all make mistakes - I still think he should know better in the first place.
his apology is crap though, he makes out you can barely tell what he says unless listening through earphones loudly..... i can hear what he says easily.
Well - then he's a wet fart and the self preservation gene has kicked in - it does say it happened a couple of years ago.... It reminds me of when David Attenborough was narrating 'pop goes the weasel' and was taped doing it climbing a tree in a rain forest somewhere. Now that's a bloke that has integrated and travelled, unlike Clarkson that does that colonial bullMarmite which it appears might not be an act wherever he goes.