Is Stephen Fry a repulsive, condescending misogynistic turd?

[Absentmindedsmile]

I realised on the first thread about lovely Stephen Fry, that I should have put an AIBU. I’m interested to know the wider view, beyond us sex realists on the FWR board.

So if you’ve got time, take a flick through the last thread (link attached), and using that plus your existing knowledge of the man, what do you think?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5357749-stephen-fry-what-a-repulsive-condescending-misogynistic-turd?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

YABU - No he’s lovely.

YANBU - Yes, he is at the very least, a misogynistic wanker.

Don't like Stephen Fry, but just observing that if you substitute the DM or Telegraph for Guardian there, that describes 95% of MN posters. Pot, kettle, black?

A champagne socialist is a hypocritical arse. While living the high life and benefiting from capitalism they publicly lecture those who are far less fortunate than they are on socialist and far left notions, all the while enjoying their vastly privileged lifestyle. Like Fry.

Basically, anyone who lectures poor people and insist they should vote far left while they themselves live the life of Reilly can be accused of being a champagne socialist.

It's particularly loathesome if the person has always been well to do and never really had to struggle financially. Like Fry.

Fry appeared in a 1993 party political broadcast for Neil Kinnock and considered becoming a Labour MP. He supported Labour again in 2017 and backed Keir Starmer before the 2024 election.

Fry owns a a grade 1 Georgian mansion in Norfolk, England, valued at millions, with extensive grounds and historic features, wears bespoke designer suits and owns a private plane which he uses to travel to his many engagements and holidays. He also maintains a London townhouse decorated with antique furnishings and art.

Capitalism and hoarding his wealth - the opposite of the politics he preaches - have been very very good to Stephen Fry.

He's a hypocrite as well as a creepy bastard.

I have met Stephen Fry on a number of occasions. His views are somewhat different to mine. I have however found him to be a very good person and actually quite accepting that different views to his own exist. I remember him being particularly good with the DCs when they were small. We do need to learn again the art of being able to disagree without completing seeing the other side of an argument as the devil incarnate.

Can’t abide him for all of the above. He often seems contemptuous of very ordinary things and people. I think k he probably ly is whether it’s ordinary women for ordinary sex. His marriage is uncomfortable and the images disquieting. I am surprised he has t been phased out more but then he has all the confidence of a wealthy, connected, upper class white man.

Now he’s got a husband to inherit all that wealth. Lucky young looking boy- husband. It’s almost as if SF gets one thing out of the marriage, and his husband gets entirely, another. Twas ever thus I suppose. Although usually the older falling apart creep part of the marriage isn’t as vocal in their adoration / admiration of young child like bodies. Or their thoughts that raped children, in grooming gangs, are prostitutes, like in the olden days. 🤮😖🤮😖🤮

@ResidentPorker "Champagne socialist" is normally used for those who are totally out of touch with working class people. Fry definitely is.

@Cyclebabble I wouldnt let him anywhere near a child of mine, he's always made my flesh creep even before I read about his views on paedophiles.

Hahahahaha! I particularly love the "The creepy man who minimises child rape is friends with Peter Tatchell and supported him to try to get the age of consent for children to be raped removed and wrote a story about a child rapist in a "relationship" with an older man was great with my kids" wink wink. 👏👏👏

Well done on a most excellent attempt to wind everyone up.

Well, nobody gets everything right! He's right that it's happening in England. Not much chance of Scotland following England's idiotic example of privatising the water supply, fortunately.

While I might also raise an eyebrow at the age difference (even though it is none of my business) I would stop short of criticising his partner’s style. He is young and can surely dress accordingly. What do you want him to do? Wear a smoking jacket and dress like Jeeves?

Hi @ResidentPorker
Champagne Socialist is an insult because it is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms.

Someone cannot truly be a socialist and uphold those values whilst glugging the champers (metaphorically but maybe also literally). If you are a "champagne charlie", you would be indulgent, egocentric, throwing money about and have a vastly different value system of society. To be called this would be a deep wound to anyone who considers themselves to be a true socialist.

He's foul

A lot of people are charming on a superficial basis. That shouldn’t be mistaken for overall good character by itself…

My ex is very narcissistic but he manages to charm everyone at conferences he goes to. After a while of thinking he’s the best thing since sliced bread, these people distance themselves from him because they realise what he’s really like.

Anyone who does relatively well in life can be called a champagne socialist. I feel it can be said of me. I come from a working class background and have done very well in life. You can be wealthy and believe that everyone deserves to have the opportunity to better themselves and need help to do so. People seem to think it is hypocritical if you don’t give up your money to help them , which is hardly the point.

"Nothing you say stops transwomen being women": so striking. Woman, stfu, no dies not mean no,and you certainly won't say no to men.

His comment about women not liking sex was years ago but I still remember it. What a condescending twat! :

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/oct/31/stephen-fry-sex-women-relationships-attitude

I also think there’s something creepy about him. That is, he’s one of those men who give me a visceral feeling of unease. Being charming doesn’t equal being nice, safe, kind or anything. It often equals egotism and manipulation.

Your post is patronising.

My parents grew up poor, my father in particular in extreme poverty. My dad turned his life around in my early teens and was able to send us to private school and buy a nice house in a nice area.

He did it to give us the best possible start in life, not to avoid riff raff. My sibling and I are both successful in our fields, high earners and mortgage free in our late 30s/early 40s. So it worked.

We both spend a significant amount of time doing charity work, and have done since our teens, something our parents insisted on. We're involved in social projects and local politics. We were raised with the ethos of "Once you're happy with your own life, focus on helping others become happy with theirs".

But according to you, this is 'out of touch and patronising'? Should we just be selfish instead?

His comments about child rape and sexual abuse victims are disgusting. Completely abhorrent. So for me, it both starts and ends there. Anyone that talks about "child prostitution" is a huge, walking red flag.

If you are talking about the rape of children in any manner other than complete horror and disgust then you are outing yourself as an utter creep. It really is that simple for me.

I agree with him on Rowling. She is obsessive about gender and I think a lot of MN is too, to the point where people think it justifies name calling and extreme division.

Agreed. Surely the vast majority of people think that too. The question this leaves us with is why then? Why then is he still being paid and on tv? There’s some toxic arse licking / dick sucking going on in those circles, for sure. Why else is he still around? Because he ‘brings in money’? Surely not anymore. They’ve tried to sell him as a ‘national treasure’ 🤢🤢🤮. It ain’t working any more. He’s in plain sight and it’s time he went to have a cold coffee with Phillip, Hugh, jimmys ghost, Jonathan’s ghost, and the rest of them in the paedo graveyard (metaphorical or otherwise).

No no. JKR states biological fact. Sex. Men and women. They are real. That is all. Anyone who twaddles on otherwise, is woeful in their misunderstanding. Mind you, succumbing to gender wang has that effect on people, it would appear. .

Is the Baby Reindeer thing true? This is the first I've heard of it but would make sense? I thought the abuser who was still around was someone else who we can't mention but must be 90 now/national treasure

This 100%

Another out of touch rich boy that become an even more out of touch very rich man, giving disgusting opinions because in the rich circles they are more depraved and degenerate than anyone outside of it. Why? Because when you have wealth, you automatically elevate yourself above the general population, money and perception are the only things this country has ever taken seriously, therefore all that you know, say and do is right because you have money and the perception that by default, you are better, so even your deviant behaviour is perfectly acceptable…Which leads to the delusion that moral code is for those who endure consequences for their transgressions. If the rich get up to all sorts, whats the consequence that they cant spend their way out of? And thats the mindset of many wealthy individuals. Stephen Fry honestly believes he is far more intelligent than most so can openly say such vile statements because to him they are factual and not just opinion, added to his obvious belief that he is untouchable and you end up with a very vile individual.

I used to like him, but I recently listened to him on a podcast and he wasn't as profound and intelligent as I remember. He was also giving his opinions on things as though it was fact... which started to grate after a while.

Also, the 29 year age gap he has with his husband gives creepy vibes.

It’s his opinions about child sexual abuse victims and female victims of male assault that make me think he’s a terrible person, not the f at he doesn’t like J.K. Rowling TBH. Some thing are objectively terrible!

He's a flawed human, like all of us, and while publicly acknowledging some of his flaws, almost certainly denies others
He has shown himself, on occasion, to lack compassion, but on others to be warm and sympathetic - again, just like all of us
He acknowledges his success is down to luck, not work, he does encourage and support new talent - both as mentor and financially - but he also tears down people with whom he disagrees
On balance, he's just human