To ask what exactly Clarkson

[Nogbreaks]

Feels Meghan has done to him to justify the vitriol and misogyny of that article he wrote where he’d like to see her naked and assaulted?

I mean WTF? How in earth did a major publication think that it was fine to publish his little sexual fantasy about hurting a woman like that?

I’m no fan of the Royals in any form, and could care less about their infighting, but why are we surprised that there is so much violence against women and girls when this kind of article by an influential man is seen as okay to write?
Where’s his description of a naked, vulnerable Harry being assaulted??

That was in GOT? Jesus. Fucking weird show that was.

It was a horrendous thing to say, but I don't expect anything less from Jeremy Clarkson.

I find the MM hate really strange to be honest. I bet the incels hate her too. Shame we've got a press that consists of them.

He was happy to help her network in the UK she dropped him when she found a better contact and he has revealed her for what he believes her to be, a fame hungry narcissist. Now disagree with him all you like but let's leave 'sexual rage' and 'short skirts' out of it shall we?

Agree.
They are not seeing her in a sexually frustrated or racist way. They know what they believe she is. JC and PM are also cut from the same cloth hence they are like they are with each other.

let's leave 'sexual rage' and 'short skirts' out of it shall we?

Why must we leave sexual rage out of it when it's clearly a key motivation? This is way beyond just finding Meghan annoying.

It was, and I got the reference, and I know the context, but that makes no difference. It's still inexcusable.

What kind of behaviour would justify Morgan harping on about her, day after day, for years at this stage?

So what if she stopped returning his calls? No one is obliged to stay in touch with a person they met once.

‘'I'll just add it to my list:'
'You were wearing a short skirt'
'You shouldn't have been drunk'
'It can't have been him, he has a hot wife.'

You are absolutely taking this 'dangerously' out of context.’

no, victim blaming is EXACTLY what some posters, the ones defending Clarkson from the literally indefensible, are doing…
Just a people make excuses for men who sexually assaulted in real - look at that US rapist who was caught actually raping an unconscious woman- she got drunk at a party, so it was her fault and his fucking SWIMMING times were taken into account, as if he couldn’t be a rapist because he swam for
Harvard.

Piers Morgan has a whole channel dedicated to frothing about MM I saw a clip earlier where he had Paul Burrel frothing with him. Then you have that awful kiwi man who's name I've forgotten frothing on GB news, it's a whole world of Meghan hatred!

Totally disagree. He was .pissed off when he wasn't invited to the wedding

I saw a montage of his WhatsApps, he was sick sweet.obsessed with her, forever whatsapping how wonderful she was, and the nearer it got to the wedding and it was apparent he wasn't going, he turned

P.s. blame her for being a narcissist why don't you. Like you can diagnose people

Awful. Again it's victim blaming,she deserved it etc

He doesn’t harp on about her day after day, he harps on about her when she pops up in the headlines and hits his radar. It’s typical Narcissistic behaviour.

Exactly. They met ONCE face to face. Just ONCE.

One of the things I don’t understand is why the Sun’s Editor, Victoria Newton, seems to be being allowed to quietly slip away from the scene? She’s as responsible as Clarkson for this sick misogynist fantasy being published.

The ‘article’ would have gone through multiple hands before someone pressed the ‘publish’ button. She’s a poor Editor and needs to be fired for incompetence. She was Deputy Editor of the News of the World before of it was closed down over phone hacking so that tells you all you need to know about her professional standards.

She wouldn’t be able to get a job editing a high school paper in America but seems to be doing pretty well in the UK. Says something about our press and how having the right chums is more important than your ability to do your job in some sectors.

He doesn’t harp on about her day after day, he harps on about her when she pops up in the headlines and hits his radar.

He's part of the engine that puts her in the headlines in the first place ffs. No media outlet is obliged to report on her. They choose to.

And please stop diagnosing people you've never met as narcissistic over the internet. It's just the height of stupidity.

One of the things I don’t understand is why the Sun’s Editor, Victoria Newton, seems to be being allowed to quietly slip away from the scene? She’s as responsible as Clarkson for this sick misogynist fantasy being published.

This is a fair point

He was happy to help her network in the UK she dropped him when she found a better contact and he has revealed her for what he believes her to be, a fame hungry narcissist.

Or, she was ignorant of what type of guy he actually was and was forewarned.

What other woman is expected to maintain contact with a man she's met once, no matter how much of an arsehole he turns out to be?

It's like the Meghan Markle alternative universe rule book.

He doesn’t put her in the headlines, he puts himself in the headlines, just the way he likes it.

There are key behaviour patterns and it’s very difficult not to ‘call it’ when you see it. Once experienced never forgotten.

He doesn’t put her in the headlines, he puts himself in the headlines, just the way he likes it.

Who are you talking about here?

Exactly.

I recall the avocado fiasco. Who the f-k cared that MM ate avocados yet the tabloids added that it was fueling droughts and murder. It was another piece of evidence then how the British press was treating her differently especially when KM said she was eating avocados to starve off morning sickness. Heck, there’s a YT video of a boy giving PW an avocado to help her.

It's only fair isn't it? If making threats against strangers and hiding behind TV reference has become acceptable, then the gloves come off and it's open season to all.

I'm not sure we'd like where it will lead, not that it's not already gone that way anyway.

It's my opinion that all the people calling MM a narcissist and a traitor etc etc etc wouldn't have even thought of those things, unless they'd read the onslaught of hatchet jobs in the Mail.

And believed everything.

Interestingly, I have just come across the thread on AIBU which has a link to Piers Morgan's comments on the Clarkson article which I hadn't seen or read. I'm not in the least bit surprised that was Piers reaction and bears out my earlier post(s) in particular my comments below:

He doesn’t harp on about her day after day, he harps on about her when she pops up in the headlines and hits his radar. It’s typical Narcissistic behaviour.

He doesn’t put her in the headlines, he puts himself in the headlines, just the way he likes it.

Newspaper editors put people in the headlines love. She doesn't 'put herself' in headlines. If that's what you meant in your extremely garbled point upthread.

And if you stopped clicking on the links about her and posting on threads about her and generally demonstrating your interest (whether that's positive or negative) they'd stop.

Because they don't 'put people in the headlines' who the public have mo interest in.

That said I don't think this situation is anything to do with 'sexual rage' . He has been with his very attractive wife years,

I don't know if there's sexual rage or not but you say this as if men who cheat on their wives all have ugly wives. His wife being attractive, as you say, doesn't determine if there's sexual rage or not, and wouldn't affect it if there's one.