David Starkey, 73, moans his broadcasting career has been ruined by 'old, ugly women'

[hungryhippie]

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5960893/SEBASTIAN-SHAKESPEARE-David-Starkey-73-moans-career-ruined-old-ugly-women.html

"Outspoken historian David Starkey — one of television's most prolific Tudor experts — claims that his broadcasting career has been ruined by the popularity of his female rivals."

Maybe they are just better than you David?
What an arsehole

I skimmed through the comments under the DM article (took one for the team) until I got bored, and I'm pleased to report they're overwhelmingly anti-Starkey. The words rude, arrogant, boring and unpleasant were getting good use.

I must stand up for Mary Beard.

She’s engaging, a fantastic presenter and brings a real enthusiasm to her TV work that just hooks you in. I never understand the ‘ugly’ thing - she always looks perfectly OK to me and generally has a fabulous line in necklaces. Not that it would matter if she did look ‘ugly’ - it’s her infectious enthusiasm that grips the viewer.

Starkey’s obvious disdain for women has been something I’ve noticed before and it detracts from his work. Be as rude as you like, but to dismiss women as he does means he diminishes some of his subjects - Elizabeth I is one of the greatest women in history. She was highly intelligent, multilingual, skilled at politicking and ruled the country well - most of our male rulers didn’t manage a fraction of that.

Shame on you sir!

I shall add, in the interests of balance, that I enjoyed his magnificent eye-roll after a segment by Philippa Gregory when they were talking heads on a programme about Anne Boleyn. Even as I got annoyed that she was reinforcing all his prejudices against 'lady writers'.

I was just about to post but BowlofBabelfish has said exactly what I was going to say.

Mary Beard is, indeed, marvellous.

ha! I love that a few years ago he was bemoaning young, attractive women, and now it's old unattractive ones. Honestly, it's almost as if pretty much anyone is more engaging and appealing on TV than David Starkey...

What an idiot.

What does he see in the mirror?

He is quite a bitchy historian, too much opinion over fact.

His popularity has waned because he has shown himself to be sexist, racist, out of touch and really quite a nasty piece of work.

It'll be that Starkey, mate! Not those pesky old talented female historians.

(Plus Mary Beard is just SO much better than you )

He is also uncannily like Edward and Tubbs, so that doesn't help...

One other thing I loved about her Romans series was how she was so into the tiny little details of everyday life - how people actually lived. Then she was able to bring all that and relate it to the big picture - i think that's not an easy thing to do and shows great intellectual grasp of a field.

Carry on doing what you do Mary. Being an intelligent woman in a male dominated field has never been easy.

Mary Beard is fabulous. Oh how I’d love to sit down and chew the fat with her. She is a real thinker, rather than just a fact machine.
I saw her once, on a bus in the town where I live. I was too shy to say hello. Wish I had now.

There seem to be some men who have never realised that if you listen to what women are saying, you'll realise that they are fully fledged people with rich inner lives, and once you do that you actually stop noticing what they look like anyway.

Or that might just be me - I actually have to think hard to picture someone, because they just are a 'them blob' in my head, of which what they look like is just one small, fuzzy, part

Bowl, I think you've hit on one of the crucial differences. MB is interested and cares about people, she sees history as a mosaic of individual fragments of lives and experiences and painstakingly recreates the personal to build a bigger picture of the past.

Starkey likes tales of power. That's why monarchy has always fascinated him. His big picture would be a giant Holbein portrait of the king. His people are pawns with a few knights and bishops. The one person Starkey has always claimed that no one else understands half so well as him and the person who has enthralled him is, of course, that bloated egotistical monster, Henry VIII.

I'm not saying that I haven't enjoyed his books, they are accessible, informative and waspish. But they lack the empathy that a historian such as Beard brings.

He's a grumpy old arse. The only good thing I've ever seen from him was the time he shut up the equally annoying Laurie Penny during a live debate.

I'd far rather watch Mary Beard or Lucy Worsley than David Starkey. As others have said Mary's enthusiasm brings the subject she's talking about to life, and I do enjoy Lucy's wry sense of humour.

Mostly sensible comments.
So essentially his gripe is that other TV historians are either too old and ugly, or too pretty or - well, women. And not him.

For all he decries twitter, he's a twit.

My dh is a historian. An actual one. Not on TV. He's willing to listen to all views if backed up with evidence even if he doesn't like the voice. Starkey has become increasingly difficult to accept as a historian because he is all opinion and sneer without the evidence. Lucy W does tend in that direction too (but I really like her). Mary B is just awesome.

is it just me?

She Wolves, Helen Castor. The book is brilliant.

First episode here and the rest on Netflix.

Thanks very much everyone for the great support, mary

!!

Have we been visited by academic royalty?!!

Thrilled if so!!

Go Mary!

When I grow up, I want to be Mary Beard