Clarkson: Racist
Discussion
Mr Snap said:
Axionknight said:
Mr Snap said:
They built a whole bridge in order to deliver a racist punchline.
Sorry, what?Do you mean you don't understand plain English, or do you think that TG is completely spontaneous and unscripted?
foreverdriving said:
If the term Clarkson used once is so offensive, why did the Telegraph print it ten times?
Yes, I wondered yesterday why they kept using the same term on the BBC news, given that they're very careful to say "the n-word" rather than actually saying the word, even when it's the same situation, reporting on someone saying it who ought not to have done.Mr Snap said:
They built a whole bridge in order to deliver a racist punchline.
I'm sorry but that is beyond ridiculous. Do you really believe that the entire premise for the show was set up simply to achieve a singular goal of delivering a racist punchline that likely went over the heads of 99+% of the viewers.
People of asian descent will probably listen to that punch line and think 'he is right, that bridge does have a slope on it, should have built it a bit better'.
Sometime us brits need to lighten up! I am of asian descent...the british public has just educated all us brown people of another term to put on the race card. thanks!
PC gone mad...i will be the first to kick the next PC nutter...this is getting too much that black and brown people are laughing at this nonsense.
Sometime us brits need to lighten up! I am of asian descent...the british public has just educated all us brown people of another term to put on the race card. thanks!
PC gone mad...i will be the first to kick the next PC nutter...this is getting too much that black and brown people are laughing at this nonsense.
Mr Snap said:
Sorry, what? What bit did't you understand?
Do you mean you don't understand plain English, or do you think that TG is completely spontaneous and unscripted?
I don't understand how you can think they built the bridge simply so they could deliver a racist punchline.....Do you mean you don't understand plain English, or do you think that TG is completely spontaneous and unscripted?
Tally ho chaps, we would like to make a racist remark on the telly, and the only way I can see us getting away with it is if we invest a lot of time and effort building a bridge over a river in a far flung nation.
It isn't about plain English, more like plain stupidity on your part if you actually believe that
London424 said:
So when I watch a Tarantino film that delivers lots of racist lines...that has been scripted, in order to deliver a racist line. I'm genuinely confused.
a) Top Gear isn't a Tarantino film. Reservoir Dogs has an 18 rating and you can only see it at the cinema or, if it is broadcast, it comes with a parental warning and never earlier than 11pm. Clarkson is considered family viewing for before the watershed, Tarantino isn't. If someone can't tell the difference, it means they're a bit f
ked up and would probably show Reservoir Dogs to a minor. b) Yes there are racist insults in Tarantino but they're indiscriminate, in the sense that all races use them to each other. It isn't one 'superior' race insulting an inferior race and getting away with it, this kinda equals out. Moreover, if Clarkson had been in a Tarantino film, the asian gentleman might have crossed the bridge and kicked the s
t out of JC for being racist; whereas, in Top Gear, I think we can guarantee that wasn't going to happen. The man was used as a stooge - and that is racist. c) There's a tradition in western art and culture that you can create a work of art using something forbidden and transgressive to make a bigger point: Consider the sex in Lady Chatterley's Lover, the violence in Saving Private Ryan or the effing and blinding and racism in Till Death Us Do Part. Tarantino is a widely acclaimed transgressive artist who uses casual violence and racism to make points about violence and racism in the context of film. Clarkson, on the other hand, does it for giggles. In 100 years time, people will still be watching Tarantino for the same reason people still watch All Quiet on the Western Front now - it's great art. The only reason people will watch Clarkson will be to see what racism was like in 2014 - a bit like the way we cringe now when we see Love Thy Neighbour.
d) Ofcom said: "Jeremy Clarkson used the word 'slope' to refer both to an Asian man crossing a bridge, and the incline of the bridge…. [b]This was scripted in advance[\b]. The BBC failed to take the opportunity, either during filming or post-production, to check whether the word had the potential to offend viewers."
ie. Somebody scripted the line - probably in London - where it got approved. You can't get the money to do something like this without backing and backing requires 'script approval'. The gag was planned in advance like all the other gags in the program - that's how tv and tv commissioning works, very little on a project like this is truly spontaneous. A team then went to Burma and built a bridge knowing that the line was going to be delivered before the bridge was built.
As people have said 100 times in this thread, it's all to do with context; and that's where JC lets himself down.
with a few exceptions i was under the impression that words only become racist when you add a negative word to the same phrase.
referring to an asian guy as a slope is no worse than calling someone who likes jap cars a ricer.
If he had called him a 'dirty', 'stinky' or 'fat' slope then it becomes offensive otherwise its a stereotype at worst.
Honestly - lets get rid of the term racist and just have a law for being generally offensive - regardless of motivation.
Guy in question probably doesn't even own a television, let alone watch top gear - how is he likely to ever see it to be offended?
Monumental waste of everyones time.
referring to an asian guy as a slope is no worse than calling someone who likes jap cars a ricer.
If he had called him a 'dirty', 'stinky' or 'fat' slope then it becomes offensive otherwise its a stereotype at worst.
Honestly - lets get rid of the term racist and just have a law for being generally offensive - regardless of motivation.
Guy in question probably doesn't even own a television, let alone watch top gear - how is he likely to ever see it to be offended?
Monumental waste of everyones time.
I can't be arsed to read all this thread (time's money as they say) but imo the bottom line here is that prior to March this year virtually nobody on these shores knew that the word 'Slope' had any racist connotation, whatsoever.
Now, thanks to one(?) complainant and, naturally,
the pc brigade, they have put a whole new 'angle' 
on it, and the whole ruddy country knows. Many probably fearing ever uttering the word again, just in case, just... that it might be construed in a different way to what is meant. Roll on the winter games.
You'd think Clarkson had committed murder. The sad thing is it would probably have got less coverage if he had.
Now, thanks to one(?) complainant and, naturally,
the pc brigade, they have put a whole new 'angle' on it, and the whole ruddy country knows. Many probably fearing ever uttering the word again, just in case, just... that it might be construed in a different way to what is meant. Roll on the winter games.You'd think Clarkson had committed murder. The sad thing is it would probably have got less coverage if he had.
Mr Snap said:
London424 said:
So when I watch a Tarantino film that delivers lots of racist lines...that has been scripted, in order to deliver a racist line. I'm genuinely confused.
a) Top Gear isn't a Tarantino film. Reservoir Dogs has an 18 rating and you can only see it at the cinema or, if it is broadcast, it comes with a parental warning and never earlier than 11pm. Clarkson is considered family viewing for before the watershed, Tarantino isn't. If someone can't tell the difference, it means they're a bit fked up and would probably show Reservoir Dogs to a minor. b) Yes there are racist insults in Tarantino but they're indiscriminate, in the sense that all races use them to each other. It isn't one 'superior' race insulting an inferior race and getting away with it, this kinda equals out. Moreover, if Clarkson had been in a Tarantino film, the asian gentleman might have crossed the bridge and kicked the s
t out of JC for being racist; whereas, in Top Gear, I think we can guarantee that wasn't going to happen. The man was used as a stooge - and that is racist. c) There's a tradition in western art and culture that you can create a work of art using something forbidden and transgressive to make a bigger point: Consider the sex in Lady Chatterley's Lover, the violence in Saving Private Ryan or the effing and blinding and racism in Till Death Us Do Part. Tarantino is a widely acclaimed transgressive artist who uses casual violence and racism to make points about violence and racism in the context of film. Clarkson, on the other hand, does it for giggles. In 100 years time, people will still be watching Tarantino for the same reason people still watch All Quiet on the Western Front now - it's great art. The only reason people will watch Clarkson will be to see what racism was like in 2014 - a bit like the way we cringe now when we see Love Thy Neighbour.
d) Ofcom said: "Jeremy Clarkson used the word 'slope' to refer both to an Asian man crossing a bridge, and the incline of the bridge…. [b]This was scripted in advance[\b]. The BBC failed to take the opportunity, either during filming or post-production, to check whether the word had the potential to offend viewers."
ie. Somebody scripted the line - probably in London - where it got approved. You can't get the money to do something like this without backing and backing requires 'script approval'. The gag was planned in advance like all the other gags in the program - that's how tv and tv commissioning works, very little on a project like this is truly spontaneous. A team then went to Burma and built a bridge knowing that the line was going to be delivered before the bridge was built.
As people have said 100 times in this thread, it's all to do with context; and that's where JC lets himself down.
a) it's not racist if it's late at night
b) it's not racist if we all do it
c) sex was forbidden until D. H. Lawrence invented it; WW2 didn't happen / was peaceful until Saving Private Ryan came out
d) they built a bridge to be racist on
Mr Snap said:
London424 said:
So when I watch a Tarantino film that delivers lots of racist lines...that has been scripted, in order to deliver a racist line. I'm genuinely confused.
a) Top Gear isn't a Tarantino film. Reservoir Dogs has an 18 rating and you can only see it at the cinema or, if it is broadcast, it comes with a parental warning and never earlier than 11pm. Clarkson is considered family viewing for before the watershed, Tarantino isn't. If someone can't tell the difference, it means they're a bit fked up and would probably show Reservoir Dogs to a minor. b) Yes there are racist insults in Tarantino but they're indiscriminate, in the sense that all races use them to each other. It isn't one 'superior' race insulting an inferior race and getting away with it, this kinda equals out. Moreover, if Clarkson had been in a Tarantino film, the asian gentleman might have crossed the bridge and kicked the s
t out of JC for being racist; whereas, in Top Gear, I think we can guarantee that wasn't going to happen. The man was used as a stooge - and that is racist. c) There's a tradition in western art and culture that you can create a work of art using something forbidden and transgressive to make a bigger point: Consider the sex in Lady Chatterley's Lover, the violence in Saving Private Ryan or the effing and blinding and racism in Till Death Us Do Part. Tarantino is a widely acclaimed transgressive artist who uses casual violence and racism to make points about violence and racism in the context of film. Clarkson, on the other hand, does it for giggles. In 100 years time, people will still be watching Tarantino for the same reason people still watch All Quiet on the Western Front now - it's great art. The only reason people will watch Clarkson will be to see what racism was like in 2014 - a bit like the way we cringe now when we see Love Thy Neighbour.
d) Ofcom said: "Jeremy Clarkson used the word 'slope' to refer both to an Asian man crossing a bridge, and the incline of the bridge…. [b]This was scripted in advance[\b]. The BBC failed to take the opportunity, either during filming or post-production, to check whether the word had the potential to offend viewers."
ie. Somebody scripted the line - probably in London - where it got approved. You can't get the money to do something like this without backing and backing requires 'script approval'. The gag was planned in advance like all the other gags in the program - that's how tv and tv commissioning works, very little on a project like this is truly spontaneous. A team then went to Burma and built a bridge knowing that the line was going to be delivered before the bridge was built.
As people have said 100 times in this thread, it's all to do with context; and that's where JC lets himself down.
The artist/person who makes the TV show/film that gives you a get out as well?
TTwiggy said:
Pixelpeep7r said:
with a few exceptions i was under the impression that words only become racist when you add a negative word to the same phrase.
I think that's the requirement for the legal definition of racial abuse, rather than simple racism.WinstonWolf said:
TTwiggy said:
Pixelpeep7r said:
with a few exceptions i was under the impression that words only become racist when you add a negative word to the same phrase.
I think that's the requirement for the legal definition of racial abuse, rather than simple racism.If someone asks me to describe a black guy in the office and I say 'he's black', then there's no problem. If I say 'he's a n*****', that's a racial slur. If I get into a row with him and call him a 'black c***' then it's racial abuse.
Seems quite simple to me.
TTwiggy said:
Some things are simply racist though.
If someone asks me to describe a black guy in the office and I say 'he's black', then there's no problem.
No because you have noticed he is a different colour to yourself you must immediately kill yourself otherwise you are racistIf someone asks me to describe a black guy in the office and I say 'he's black', then there's no problem.
it is the only way to be safe
McWigglebum4th said:
TTwiggy said:
Some things are simply racist though.
If someone asks me to describe a black guy in the office and I say 'he's black', then there's no problem.
No because you have noticed he is a different colour to yourself you must immediately kill yourself otherwise you are racistIf someone asks me to describe a black guy in the office and I say 'he's black', then there's no problem.
it is the only way to be safe
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff