Top gear

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

ACTIVE8
Posts: 2316
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 17:49
x 1

Re: Top gear

Post by ACTIVE8 » 11 Mar 2015, 18:18

If like the article says that he could be off, then if he goes to ITV then they could have him on Jeremy Kyle, to sort out his issues with the producer he had the problem with. :wink:

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 18:21

Hell Razor5543 wrote:I am getting really fed up with the "Political Correctness" brigade.
Stewart Lee on Political Correctness.. (bad language, and I don't know how to embed it)


Online
Hell Razor5543
NOT Alistair or Simon
Posts: 9421
Joined: 01 Apr 2012, 09:47
x 651

Re: Top gear

Post by Hell Razor5543 » 11 Mar 2015, 18:40

Stickyfinger wrote:They already have, they faded the word and inserted another name when shown on BBC (at the time of the anniversary)....there was a lot of jokes about a while back.
HBO in the states did it as well.
F**king Hell, we are now living in a Nanny State, imposed upon us by those of an over sensitive nature, who have more concern for those who MIGHT be offended (and intelligent people would not be, regardless of their family background) than for accurate historical fact.

I am currently watching 'The Dam Busters' on 5USA, and they have not done any censoring (other than that which may have been done in the original editing). However, at the end of each add break they advise there is offensive language in the film.
Last edited by Hell Razor5543 on 04 Apr 2015, 20:18, edited 2 times in total.

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 18:47

Hell Razor5543 wrote:
Stickyfinger wrote:They already have, they faded the word and inserted another name when shown on BBC (at the time of the anniversary)....there was a lot of jokes about a while back.
HBO in the states did it as well.
F**king Hell, we are now living in a Nanny State, imposed upon us by those of an over sensitive nature, who have more concern for those who MIGHT be offended (and intelligent people would not be, regardless of their family background) than for accurate historical fact.
I disagree. The average person under 40 has probably never heard of Guy Gibson. Probably most under 50...

So, you suddenly have a film on the telly one rainy Sunday, where some brave white pilot has a black dog with such a name.... Doesn't look good does it, unless you really understand the historical context? If we wish to rid society of racism and bigotry, we have take such measures.

Personally, I find it odd that the forum profanity filter lets me type the dog's name , and not "(-expletive removed-)"...
Last edited by Northern_Mike on 12 Mar 2015, 05:08, edited 1 time in total.

Online
Hell Razor5543
NOT Alistair or Simon
Posts: 9421
Joined: 01 Apr 2012, 09:47
x 651

Re: Top gear

Post by Hell Razor5543 » 11 Mar 2015, 19:01

I would think that intelligent, open minded people would check the facts before getting offended by something that they had concerns about. Please note that I said intelligent, open minded people. I accept that there are others who would be offended by ANYTHING that does not conform to their picture of how things should be. There is nothing that can be done about closed minded persons; even a nuclear device could not get through to them if it did not fit in with their views!

Anyway, I am not saying any more about the PC brigade, it is irritating me too much. I do, however, wish JC well, regardless of the outcome of the investigation. While he is a prat, he deserves a fair hearing, and he cannot receive one any more.

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 19:06

Hell Razor5543 wrote:I would think that intelligent, open minded people would check the facts before getting offended by something that they had concerns about.
It's simply an outdated, offensive word with no place in today's society. If you think that a 15 year old kid who sees the film on a damp Sunday afternoon with his grandad is going to check why someone had a dog called this 80 years ago, then you're sadly mistaken. They're far more likely to go and call someone it...

User avatar
Stickyfinger
Donor 2016
Posts: 9625
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
x 638

Re: Top gear

Post by Stickyfinger » 11 Mar 2015, 20:47

It's simply an outdated, offensive word with no place in today's society. If you think that a 15 year old kid who sees the film on a damp Sunday afternoon with his grandad is going to check why someone had a dog called this 80 years ago, then you're sadly mistaken. They're far more likely to go and call someone it...
Is that not a good time for the adult to explain the situation, why the word was OK then and not now....ect ect......oh I forgot, the Adult thinks Churchill is a puppet dog....... so what hope.

god |I want to shoot myself now

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 20:57

Stickyfinger wrote:
It's simply an outdated, offensive word with no place in today's society. If you think that a 15 year old kid who sees the film on a damp Sunday afternoon with his grandad is going to check why someone had a dog called this 80 years ago, then you're sadly mistaken. They're far more likely to go and call someone it...
Is that not a good time for the adult to explain the situation, why the word was OK then
That's partly my point. It wasn't then either. There's references as far back as 1926 saying it's an "inhumane term"..

Vorsprung berk Technik

User avatar
Stickyfinger
Donor 2016
Posts: 9625
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
x 638

Re: Top gear

Post by Stickyfinger » 11 Mar 2015, 21:26

The "word" was certainly in accepted and wide spread/common use well into the 60's, remember the "Empire" was full of people coming home....other words we all know also came from such sources, many were not true insults at the time.

As said, the use of the word in a topical and period context is a great opportunity to remove the "shock value" and discuss the many many aspects of it's use.

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 21:36

Stickyfinger wrote: many were not true insults at the time.
To who?...

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 11 Mar 2015, 21:48

To get vaguely back on topic, I find it amazing that 400,000 people have signed a petition demanding Clarkson be reinstated without knowing whether he's guilty or not...

User avatar
NewcastleFalcon
Posts: 8654
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 11:40
x 578

Re: Top gear

Post by NewcastleFalcon » 11 Mar 2015, 23:42

Having seen the BBC news at 6.00 with wall to wall Clarkson on comes the North-East news at 6.30 with Look North from Newcastle.

and whats the first item....yes Jeremy Clarkson. The reason...amongst other things he was once seen eating Fish and Chips in Whitby :!:

Image

Regards Neil

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 12 Mar 2015, 05:07

Whilst I'm amazed at the reaction to this, I'm also led to wonder what kind of moral depravity infects many of those that slate the "lefty PC brigade" so much that they think it's perfectly normal to punch a work colleague? Whether Clarkson is guilty or not, there's still nearly 1/2 million people signed a petition that if he has punched someone at work, well, that's just fine...

Northern_Mike

Re: Top gear

Post by Northern_Mike » 12 Mar 2015, 05:15

Hell Razor5543 wrote:What was the name of Guy Gibsons' (of 617 Squadron fame) black Labrador dog? ... As the film 'The Dam Busters' gets broadcast regularly I wonder how long it will be before the PC brigade demand that is renamed to something less offensive, even though it is factually and historically accurate?
I fail to see why the name of Gibson's dog has anything whatsoever to do with anything. The only reason we hear about it is because of it's damn name!

Do we hear about Winston Churchill's pets? Did you know he had a cat called Tango? A dog called Peas? Another called Pink-Poo? No.. because it's as irrelevant as Gibson's dog. As far as I'm aware, apart from go on a couple of training flights and drink beer out of a bowl, the dog was completely unremarkable.

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 41564
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1033

Re: Top gear

Post by CitroJim » 12 Mar 2015, 08:57

JC was no doubt under extreme stress during the filming and when under stress it can take a surprisingly small event to cause a snap with consequences in the heat of the moment that are totally out of normal character. I'm sure JC does not make a habit of lamping people who fail to meet his expectations...

I know this only too well and I also know the urge to land one on the target is very strong indeed under such circumstances.

I've been there, done it, suffered the consequence and therefore I cut the old boy a bit of slack...