• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

clarkson uses the N word

let me get this straight then. He might well have said the "N" word. But it was edited out of the show and never aired live? He was asked to recite a famous lymeric to which at his age the lyrics would be obvious. And at that time was ashamed to say it hence the mumbling and then proceeded to ask for it to be totally removed from the edit.

For this you all think he should be sacked? No matter what you think of Jeremy Clarkson its hardly like he used it in mid sentence and was indifferent about it. The word is part of a rhyme which he did not want to say, mumbled and then asked for them to use a different edit before it was broadcast.

You guys are just hating on him and want him removed.
 
braineclipse said:
Clownfoot: Are you saying that you think he's a racist and that he's been keeping it (somewhat?) hidden, but this time he slipped up?
Click to expand...

I don't think he is racist. I think he is rather bigoted in an out of date way, and too arrogant to want to change with society. It would be easier to swallow if there hadn't been instances in the past. Insulting Mexicans, only recently saying something about 'slopes' etc. The guy has previous, and by allowing him to stay I think it sets a precedent to a generation of people that it is acceptable to use terminology that he did.

I can't comprehend how a grown man can say he wanted to not say a word, but managed to do it twice.
 
clownfoot said:
I don't think he is racist. I think he is rather bigoted in an out of date way, and too arrogant to want to change with society. It would be easier to swallow if there hadn't been instances in the past. Insulting Mexicans, only recently saying something about 'slopes' etc. The guy has previous, and by allowing him to stay I think it sets a precedent to a generation of people that it is acceptable to use terminology that he did.

I can't comprehend how a grown man can say he wanted to not say a word, but managed to do it twice.
Click to expand...

So you don't think he's a racist, but you think he should be fired for saying something that could be seen as a racist remark?

I disagree about the standard it sets. If anything this clearly indicates that if you say a word like this you should apologize profusely and make sure it doesn't happen again.

To me firing someone that you don't think is a racist for saying something that could be seen as a racist remark, but could also be seen as an honest mistake sets a worse precedent. I think it fuels the fire being built by the obvious racists to convince the borderline bigots to join their side. Seeing as natural prejudice comes to people I think that's poor approach.

Edit: I still don't think he said it. He mumbled something that can be interpreted like that.
 
Last edited:
braineclipse said:
So you don't think he's a racist, but you think he should be fired for saying something that could be seen as a racist remark?

I disagree about the standard it sets. If anything this clearly indicates that if you say a word like this you should apologize profusely and make sure it doesn't happen again.

To me firing someone that you don't think is a racist for saying something that could be seen as a racist remark, but could also be seen as an honest mistake sets a worse precedent. I think it fuels the fire being built by the obvious racists to convince the borderline bigots to join their side. Seeing as natural prejudice comes to people I think that's poor approach.

Edit: I still don't think he said it. He mumbled something that can be interpreted like that.
Click to expand...

This is the problem for me, he hasn't said this word before, but he has instances of other forms of bigotry and racism. It can't be once he has the full collection of the all races insulted that he is on his final warning.

If he hadn't said it, there is no way he would have made a public 'apology'
 
In the public sphere it is enough to use the N word to get sacked. These standards can be questioned but as far as consistency goes he should be gone. If he stays it is because he is a brand and the BBC cannot afford to lose him. This would be unfair.

Personally I doubt he is racist but he is a prick who has made terrible statements in the past. I do not want my license fee used to pay his wages.
 
clownfoot said:
This is the problem for me, he hasn't said this word before, but he has instances of other forms of bigotry and racism. It can't be once he has the full collection of the all races insulted that he is on his final warning.

If he hadn't said it, there is no way he would have made a public 'apology'
Click to expand...

I must have missed those other instances. I remember the Mexico hubbub, didn't really sound like bigotry to me at the time. What else has he done?

People apologize for any perceived offense these days it seems, particularly when scared of losing their high profile, highly paid job and status.

LutonSpurs said:
In the public sphere it is enough to use the N word to get sacked. These standards can be questioned but as far as consistency goes he should be gone. If he stays it is because he is a brand and the BBC cannot afford to lose him. This would be unfair.

Personally I doubt he is racist but he is a prick who has made terrible statements in the past. I do not want my license fee used to pay his wages.
Click to expand...

There are no consisntent standards on this I think. There are cost/benefit analysis.

Much more unfair when someone low profile gets sacked because they're easily replaceable for something that wasn't all that bad.

If you don't mind, what are these terrible statements he's made in the past (not saying there are none, honest question)?

So you have no issues with him getting sacked "for racism" despite you not thinking he's a racist?
 
braineclipse said:
I must have missed those other instances. I remember the Mexico hubbub, didn't really sound like bigotry to me at the time. What else has he done?

People apologize for any perceived offense these days it seems, particularly when scared of losing their high profile, highly paid job and status.



There are no consisntent standards on this I think. There are cost/benefit analysis.

Much more unfair when someone low profile gets sacked because they're easily replaceable for something that wasn't all that bad.

If you don't mind, what are these terrible statements he's made in the past (not saying there are none, honest question)?

So you have no issues with him getting sacked "for racism" despite you not thinking he's a racist?
Click to expand...

He used a racist word. I have no issues with sacking for that. I think it's enough yes.

Here is what I based my assertion of his past endeavours on..

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5245806?1398945125
 
braineclipse said:
I must have missed those other instances. I remember the Mexico hubbub, didn't really sound like bigotry to me at the time. What else has he done?
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/20...emy-clarkson-racist-joke-allegation-burma-bbc

There is a long list of inappropriate things he (and others on the show) have said here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_controversies#Cultural_mockery

Granted, a fair few of those on wikipedia are weak and likely to be character attacks on him, but he has too many flirtations with 'casual racism' to not find it alarming anymore
 
Sandman said:
let me get this straight then. He might well have said the "N" word. But it was edited out of the show and never aired live? He was asked to recite a famous lymeric to which at his age the lyrics would be obvious. And at that time was ashamed to say it hence the mumbling and then proceeded to ask for it to be totally removed from the edit.

For this you all think he should be sacked? No matter what you think of Jeremy Clarkson its hardly like he used it in mid sentence and was indifferent about it. The word is part of a rhyme which he did not want to say, mumbled and then asked for them to use a different edit before it was broadcast.

You guys are just hating on him and want him removed.
Click to expand...
Do you not think he writes, or at least has input into, the pieces he does on the show? Why on earth would you even think of doing a bit like that? It's a very odd thing to do. They didn't broadcast it, but it presumably was the idea to? Just very odd.

I've no feelings towards Clarkson either way really, his books are terrible but I quite like him on Top Gear by and large, or I did when I used to make a point of watching it (bit too obviously contrived these days).
 
galeforce said:
solely using the work is enough to sack him?

so if a news reader reported this and quoted him they should be sacked as well?
Click to expand...

No. He said the rhyme. And used the word clearly to me. He wasn't quoting anyone. He was singing the racist version and he knew it was a racist version. Not quoting anyone else.
 
"casual racism" is the key. He has prior. He's a racist prick and finally getting his comeuppance now he's taken things a bit too far.

I mean, how hard is it to say tiger for crying out loud? I grew up saying the n in that rhyme not knowing what it meant. If somebody wanted me to say that rhyme I'd hardly revert to the old version by some sort of default.
 
LutonSpurs said:
He used a racist word. I have no issues with sacking for that. I think it's enough yes.

Here is what I based my assertion of his past endeavours on..

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5245806?1398945125
Click to expand...

The only one there that comes close to being something someone should get sacked over is the "slope" comment. In a way I think it's actually worse than the latest n-word kerfuffle as it was clearly audible, broadcasted and aimed at a person. At the same time it's a racial slur that's not as bad as the n-word. Illustrated in this thread by not a single poster using "the s-word".

At the same time it was clearly a joke. Obviously not mean spirited. And to me I thought there even was a slight cultural commentary in there (although I might be giving him too much credit).

I enjoy watching stand-up comedians that go much further than Clarkson does. Perhaps I have thicker skin, perhaps I'm a bit insensitive? But as long as something like this is used for comedy I have a very high bar for being genuinely offended. I don't want to make a slippery slope* argument here, but I don't like the direction that is heading.

*If I knew a synonym I would have used it ;)
 
Leaked to the media by somebody at the BBC, the same organisation that let Saville and his pals **** kids for years and not say a word
 
braineclipse said:
*If I knew a synonym I would have used it ;)
Click to expand...

Non-argument?

I don't disagree with a lot of what you say. Other comedians go farther but in the specific context of comedy clubs, not public TV.

Clarkson is a bigot, rather than a racist, but why excuse this? I used to enjoy his articles in the Sunday Times until a nasty anti-Greek one a long time ago (possibly the 80s). His modus operandus is bigotry dressed up as an anti-PC agenda. He has a hostory of cultural racism. I think our broadcasting would have been better if he was dumped long ago, but if this is the reason he can claim to be unlucky ... this time.
 
I've been trying to recite the version I know for the last hour and have finally found it!

Eeeny meeny miny mo - catch a finger of a toad - if he bites...

Chinese whispers in North London early 80's it seems! :D

It's amazing the support for Paxman in this. Whether he is racist or not is not the point. You are in a place of work - you watch what you say and if you happen to find someone that takes offence, then you take it on the chin and can explain yourself. As mentioned, it's not the first time though is it?
 
Papercut said:
It's amazing the support for Paxman in this. Whether he is racist or not is not the point. You are in a place of work - you watch what you say and if you happen to find someone that takes offence, then you take it on the chin and can explain yourself. As mentioned, it's not the first time though is it?
Click to expand...
Poor old Paxo, what's he ever done to you? ;)
 
I may get lambasted for this but as far as im concerned, what happens in private stays private. Within reason of course, not alluding to murder or *struggle cuddle* etc. But what happens out of th epublic eye should realy stay out of it.

Im sure we have all had discussions with mates etc indoors talking about whatever.

and no im not racist DUH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back