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??

The Met Police have already suggested that he hasn't committed a hate crime (women being open season where other vulnerable groups are protected) and that they're not there to 'police people's ethics', to quote the words of their commissioner.

Until someone reports the likes of Kellie-Jay Keen for making a statement - likely to the effect that biological sex matters - which offended someone. Then they're on the blower to her inviting her for a 'voluntary' interview, without telling her what crime she's supposedly committed and threatening to arrest her should she choose not to comply.

Welcome to Gilead. 'Under His Eye ...'

That statement is archaic

In the meantime the Taliban have put in place a total ban on education for women and girls. Do you know how much men hate us? Clarkson is just saying it out loud. Any man who does not condemn what he said is complicit as far as I’m concerned. (And yes obviously not all men before anyone posts to say how lovely their husband/dad/son is - yes so are mine but they aren’t marching in the street to stop this shit either are they???) I honestly despair today.

I’ve only just seen that ITV have confined they will persist with him as host of WWTBAM.

Utterly spineless.

Christ but it's an awful time to be a woman

Yes, it did.

I'd go further in suggesting that all this augurs strongly of the Windsors having provoked it in the first place.

That does seem to imply it, no? What else do you mean?

Except he wasn’t inciting violence, he wasn’t being racist, and he didn’t commit any crime.
I’ve never seen such an over reaction to a slightly offensive, but clearly humorous, piece of writing.

What was funny about it?

I agree that there was nothing within the four corners of the article that was racist or rose to the legal threshold for inciting violence (or even close to it).

Offensiveness is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I found the article to be disgusting, misogynistic, hate-filled and completely unfit for publication in any mainstream outlet. The fact that it’s become the most complained about article in the history of the UK would suggest that this is a very widespread opinion

It certainly was not ‘clearly humorous’. If you found it funny, you’re probably as deranged as he is.

Jeremy Clark’s on wears jeans with suit jackets

You love somebody that punches a guy whilst demanding food. Tells a little kid to piss off for asking for an autograph. Calls a guy who has committed suicide inconsiderate because Clarkson's train is delayed. Clarkson is a nasty piece of work.

Why is she odious?

All the posters listing Clarkson's misdemeanors keep leaving out the time when he was, actually, clearly and openly racist during a TV programme. He and the BBC were hammered for it by OFCOM, but how soon everyone forgets. He IS a racist.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/28/top-gear-jeremy-clarkson-racial-term-ofcom-bbc

I’ve never seen such an over reaction to a slightly offensive, but clearly humorous, piece of writing.’

you’re clearly a Jezza super fan then. Does the reaction not make stop and reflect for a moment about whether or not this piece was actually ‘ humorous’? Because not many people seem to agree with you. And eve the ones defending him in some kind of freedom of speech bullshit still think what he wrote was awful.

Still not seeing any supposed humour

Perhaps he,the others who dislike harry and Meghan can find a large baby ballon like that which was done for Trump and Khan, to fly over London at the Coronation.

Or produce dog chew toys of them….

‘I’ve only just seen that ITV have confined they will persist with him as host of WWTBAM.

Utterly spineless.’

He’s worth too much to them. Look at all the shitty things he’s said or done over the last 5 years or so, and still they kept him as the presenter of their flagship show. Because he’s a ‘good broadcaster’.

A wonderfully angry 91 year old lady tells it like it is.

twitter.com/gayleLackey11/status/1605690106894905345

Ok maybe I am overreacting a bit and maybe he hasn’t broken any laws. I am so very weary and pissed off. The point is that Clarkson has a large audience, he has followers and he has influence. Saying that kind of stuff has consequences. Do you think the woman who was the target for that hatred is going to feel safe now? And secondly if the police can visit women to investigate ‘hate incidents’ for implying that men can’t be women or being ‘rude about a paedophile’ or whatever the phrase was, then why aren’t they investigating a white man saying how much he wants to throw shit at a naked black woman?

@Trainbear Perhaps he,the others who dislike harry and Meghan can find a large baby ballon like that which was done for Trump and Khan, to fly over London at the Coronation.
Or produce dog chew toys of them….

Noooo, stop giving them ideas....!

outoftheblueartifacts.com/mrs-margaret-thatcher-toilet-roll-1980s/

Joan is lovely. Fondly, almost lovingly and certainly with great respect, refers to the ‘old Queen.’ Charles, not so much….

@vera99 she’s nails it. How can we respect Charles as King and leader when he spinelessly refuses to speak out against Clarkson’s vile comments about his DIL, and his wife finds with Clarkson?

Joan is wonderful. She asks 'how on earth can he just stand aside, they cannot pretend they do not know what is going on, it is outrageous. Most men, women and parents would not just stand aside and allow it to go on. It's a cruel regime'

With age comes wisdom…

JC is free to have his opinions, and free to express them obvs as we do have free speech, but there’s no way he should be broadcasting them in a national newspaper, and he’ll have to be prepared for any consequences for being revealed ( yet again) to be a vile bully