Clarkson: Racist
Discussion
to3m said:
I can see why the people in the comic look so pissed off. That guy is a dick - and he's always talking past them! So rude.
Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
You do realise that cartoon's aren't actually real don't you? Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
to3m said:
Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
That approach could take an awfully long time if you want to talk about everyone from India. It is very simple though, I'll give you that.Spitfire2 said:
to3m said:
I can see why the people in the comic look so pissed off. That guy is a dick - and he's always talking past them! So rude.
Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
You do realise that cartoon's aren't actually real don't you? Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
The comic is presumably intended to be a rebuttal to trolling s
t-stirrers who'd cause people problems out of all proportion to the offence actually taken when a non-approved term is used, by demonstrating that there isn't always much logic behind what people will take offence at. But this guy does not seem to be honest folk! He's at this... party, or professional gathering, or whatever, and he's meeting these people - and all he seems concerned with is what racial terms he's allowed to refer to them by! Given the apparent situation depicted in the strip, what is the relevance of any of this? Am I supposed to sympathize with this man?!I don't expect everybody to have the same response to the strip, but that was mine. Struck me as funny, that's all!
to3m said:
Spitfire2 said:
to3m said:
I can see why the people in the comic look so pissed off. That guy is a dick - and he's always talking past them! So rude.
Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
You do realise that cartoon's aren't actually real don't you? Perhaps, instead of trying to find out from a third party exactly which term or terms he can use to refer to somebody without it seeming rude or causing excessive offence, he could try simply asking them their name?
The comic is presumably intended to be a rebuttal to trolling st-stirrers who'd cause people problems out of all proportion to the offence actually taken when a non-approved term is used, by demonstrating that there isn't always much logic behind what people will take offence at. But this guy does not seem to be honest folk! He's at this... party, or professional gathering, or whatever, and he's meeting these people - and all he seems concerned with is what racial terms he's allowed to refer to them by! Given the apparent situation depicted in the strip, what is the relevance of any of this? Am I supposed to sympathize with this man?!I don't expect everybody to have the same response to the strip, but that was mine. Struck me as funny, that's all!
ETA The pun was unintentional.
Edited by Tony2or4 on Saturday 29th March 19:24
Godalmighty83 said:
I had no idea that was insult until reading this thread, honestly thought they were talking about the slope.
I didn't pick up on it either. However I think it's a pretty pathetic attempt at a gag and is racist, whether you like it or not. I bet the been didn't even realise what he was doing.
It goes to show how childish TG has become when they need to make jokes about racial terms for people. Just pathetic really.
You have to realise that there are a lot of people who despise Top Gear in general and Clarkson in particular. They dislike his views and his politics and would like to find a way to stop him expressing them. The faux outrage is covering delight in having found a way of attacking him.
I hear TG have shelved their next plan to go to Africa and excavate a well using manual digging implements.
I hear TG have shelved their next plan to go to Africa and excavate a well using manual digging implements.
otolith said:
You have to realise that there are a lot of people who despise Top Gear in general and Clarkson in particular. They dislike his views and his politics and would like to find a way to stop him expressing them. The faux outrage is covering delight in having found a way of attacking him.
I hear TG have shelved their next plan to go to Africa and excavate a well using manual digging implements.
When I started watching TG it was on a Thursday night and it was presented by Chris Goffey and William Woollard. I haven't missed an episode since then so I'm not a Top Gear hater by any means. That said I'm not impressed at this slope thing.I hear TG have shelved their next plan to go to Africa and excavate a well using manual digging implements.
Taking your example if they had done the equivalent on their trip to the source of the Nile we'd have had Clarkson remarking to Hammond that "there are a lot of spades over there". Hammond would look at some pre-positioned digging implements and a group of black Africans and agree. Would that be okay? I don't think it would be but I'd be interested to hear what others think.
As an aside I hope James May doesn't lose his job over this seeing as he wasn't in the scene.
rohrl said:
if they had done the equivalent on their trip to the source of the Nile we'd have had Clarkson remarking to Hammond that "there are a lot of spades over there". Hammond would look at some pre-positioned digging implements and a group of black Africans and agree. Would that be okay? I don't think it would be but I'd be interested to hear what others think.
So now we are making up imaginary situations to be offended by?Skinley said:
rohrl said:
if they had done the equivalent on their trip to the source of the Nile we'd have had Clarkson remarking to Hammond that "there are a lot of spades over there". Hammond would look at some pre-positioned digging implements and a group of black Africans and agree. Would that be okay? I don't think it would be but I'd be interested to hear what others think.
So now we are making up imaginary situations to be offended by?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff