Why is Jeremy C*ntson not being arrested for inciting hate and violence?

[ChristmasSparkleTastic]

I mean WTAF?

Indeed @Almostwelsh - it's a paper, but it certainly isn't a newspaper. It has the reading age of 8, which tells you a lot about the people who read it.

There are Meghan hate threads on this site daily. Often numerous. They are vile. Not as vile as Clarkson, but it's a sliding scale of hateful obsession. If it's you going on and on about how you just cannot stand her (on a cellular level?): You may think he's gone too far, but you're still Team Clarkson.

And women arrested for saying a transwoman is a man are insulting men, which is illegal,apparently. Insulting women even in the most horrific ways is and always has been just fine.

I don’t think he should be arrested, because effectively he was just doing his job. Unhinged hatred of Meghan Markle has been used to generate newspaper revenue for weeks. Columnists like Clarkson are paid to ‘say what can’t be said’, and that is what he did. The Times have been doing similar, but just haven’t used such horrible imagery. I don’t think any of this is harmless.

I do think News International need to answer questions, as the publishers of his column.

This.

Nine days wonder.
It's Clarkson, isn't it? Why is anyone surprised?

I personally think it’s a lot more overtly sexist than racist. However, he says he hates her more than Rose West or Nicola Sturgeon. His brain works in a weird way listing women he hates and grouping together a murderer and a successful female politician. So female power is as loathsome as female murderers? I can imagine that some of those pondering why Meghan is more loathsome than either of these two will be struggling for logic and come to the conclusion that her race may have something to do with it.

Is the Times still a Murdoch rag?

Yy harvest tyme

She's had death threats, so yes this is inciting violence

Where has he incited violence against her?

Please do not conflate what JK Rowling has EVER said with what Clarkson has said in order to make a case that this should be protected under free speech. It's a ridiculous comparison.

If Clarkson had written this bile as a general rant about BMW owners it would be gross, but a joke

Instead he wrote it about an individual, an individual who'd publicly stated she's been a victim of race and sexist hate and abuse by the press and public. She is an individual and he has stated he wants abuse directed at this individual.

Rowling has commented on a change to laws and social norms that are currently taking place without consulting women. In a land where the government and shadow governments, and police forces are mostly male. She has repeated what actual individuals have done. She has never expressed a vile, violent fantasy about a trans person, or I would one hundred percent agree she should be "cancelled".

People are allowed opinions. They are not allowed to incite violence or cause danger to human life. I can call out all of your life decisions but I can not yell fire in a crowded theatre and laugh as people are stomped to death, because it's free speech to shout "fire".

I tell you what else is chilling the number of men on social media who are defending him by saying shit like "its what we're all thinking". Clearly there are lots of men who think fantasising about humiliating and violently attacking women is completely normal. They walk amongst us. Dear lord.

Jeremy Clarkson man of the people. 🙄

It’s frightening, isn’t it?

Those people who say ‘it’s a joke, it’s satire’… I’m willing to accept that Clarkson is perhaps being hyperbole (albeit, he’s still a disgusting misogynist), but I’m sorry, I don’t think the average readership of The Sun will take it that way. They will read this at face value. Words have consequences. These words legitimise violence against women, the ‘give her a slap’ culture. It’s not incel; these are the thoughts of a large subculture of male British society.

And as for satire. Satire punches up. It punches at power. It punches at government. Satire isn’t punching at a woman of colour who feels she has had to flee a country due to hounding by its popular press. Who speaks of her fear and suicide thoughts. I thought until recently MM should have ignored the press, but I have changed mind. This is wrong now, too far.

And the next thought should be

‘why do I have strong feelings about somebody I have never met and who doesn’t touch my life in any way? Do I need to see a therapist?’

Jeremy Clarkson is an insufferable knob who should have a criminal record over that time he punched a producer because there wasn't a hot meal waiting on the table when he got home but using hyperbole to laugh at yourself over how disproportionately you get wound up over relatively innocuous and trivial celebrities shouldn't be a criminal offence. I mean, we've probably all devoted more time to being annoyed with Jeremy Clarkson than we have to being annoyed with Pol Pot, haven't we?

‘why do I have strong feelings about somebody I have never met and who doesn’t touch my life in any way? Do I need to see a therapist?’

The thing is this does touch the lives of ordinary women in Britain, as this hate is being normalised men (and some women) reading it. That is why people are more annoyed by Jeremy than Pol Pot.

Those saying "It's JC, what do you expect?" are almost as bad. At some point he has to be told to sit down and shut up because he's gone to far. And he really has gone too far this time. I won't allow his ugly face to taint my TV set ever again, and I did watch his farm program, which I'm now ashamed about.

@LynetteScavo I think the poster you quoted was questioning why JC has such strong feelings about Meghan not why people have strong feelings on JC

I agree - the normalisation of the hatred is a problem. However I think it’s a much bigger problem than Clarkson himself. In a way Morgan and Clarkson are helpful because they step over the line and people see how unhinged it all is.

But the problem is it still sells.

If you look at the Times today there are, as usual, about 3 different articles on M&H, none of them saying very much, but all designed to generate clicks.

People need a target and they prefer it if the target is a woman and it’s better if she isn’t white. The logical response to ‘Harry goes on ITV to promote book’, should be lack of interest unless you want to know about the book, but an article like that generates loads of responses, generally blaming Meghan for something (not quite clear what). It’s AIBU, but completely off the rails. Clarkson is writing for a known market.

Because he is astute enough to know exactly what he can get away with, he carefully skirts the line and is able to perpetrate his vileness without actually breaking any laws

Because the Sun was presumably covering his

Detestable man

"its what we're all thinking". Clearly there are lots of men who think fantasising about humiliating and violently attacking women is completely normal
In my view these kinds of sentiments are latent in a large proportion of men, the kinds of men who look up to and admire clarkson, Clarkson knows full well that he is giving them permission to act on their impulses to degrade denigrate humiliate and violently sexually assault women ☹️
I'm relieved that his daughter has spoken out against him.

All women should stand United against this!!