Jeremy Clarkson

[Chekhov]

8 hours ago, sibon said:

Relax.

The era of men’s liberation is upon us.

Just one small step for man, but…

https://news.sky.com/story/artistic-swimming-open-to-men-at-olympics-for-first-time-in-evolution-towards-inclusivity-12772976

Even talking as a swimmer synchronised swimming, with either men or women, is not a sport anyway. It's no more a sport than ballroom dancing is.

I'd go further, any "sport" which needs a panel of judges to tell you who has won, even worse if they give bonus points for "artistic impression",  is not a sport, and certainly should not be at the Olympics.

 

2 hours ago, sibon said:

You don’t even seem to agree with yourself.

You seem to want to specify when men only sessions should take place, but you also want businesses to run however they want.

You need to make your mind up.

Quite the opposite.

It is me who is being consistent.

Women only sessions are discriminatory, of course they are.

As MM pointed out a business should be free to run as it wishes. To sell its services to whom it wishes, when it wishes to do so, even if it is sexist or discriminatory, which women only sessions quite plainly are.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Chekhov

[Mister M]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

Even talking as a swimmer synchronised swimming, with either men or women, is not a sport anyway. It's no more a sport than ballroom dancing is.

I'd go further, any "sport" which needs a panel of judges to tell you who has won, even worse if they give bonus points for "artistic impression",  is not a sport, and certainly should not be at the Olympics.

 

Quite the opposite.

It is me who is being consistent.

Women only sessions are discriminatory, of course they are.

As MM pointed out a business should be free to run as it wishes. To sell its services to whom it wishes, when it wishes to do so, even if it is sexist or discriminatory, which women only sessions quite plainly are.

That doesn't sound like a thing I'd normally say....Unless there's a another Sheffield Forum poster who I share the same username initials with. In which case I'll go back to sleep.

[Magilla]

20 hours ago, Chekhov said:

It is not "priceless at all.

It appears your views on equality are out of kilter with your views on freedoms and rights...

 

...that you failed to notice you're essentially undermining yourself, is the priceless bit

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Magilla

[Chekhov]

20 hours ago, Magilla said:

It appears your views on equality are out of kilter with your views on freedoms and rights...

...that you failed to notice you're essentially undermining yourself, is the priceless bit

Where so ?

Quite the opposite.

I am saying women only swimming sessions are sexist and discriminatory (which they are by definition) but that in a  free country the business running the pool should be free to use its facilities as it sees fit.

Having said that, I admit the situation is somewhat muddied if those facilities are subsidised by the tax payer. I suppose only one women only session a week (just like only one registrar not wanting to conduct gay weddings) is a reasonable compromise.....

Edited December 24, 2022 by Chekhov

[Mister M]

I see the sun have apologised for Clarkson's comments they decided to allow.

The apology is as meaningless and mealy mouthed as Clarkson's earlier so called apology.

Both the sun and Clarkson have proven just how out of touch with basic humanity and public sentiment they are, and are now backpedaling to save face.

They're pathetic. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I see the sun have apologised for Clarkson's comments they decided to allow.

The apology is as meaningless and mealy mouthed as Clarkson's earlier so called apology.

Both the sun and Clarkson have proven just how out of touch with basic humanity and public sentiment they are, and are now backpedaling to save face.

They're pathetic. 

They're 'apologising' because we're at that point in the cycle.  Clarkson gets his ring kissed by dim Sun readers because they agree with him and wish they were him; the paper gets its clicks and attention; Clarkson and Sun hacks snigger at the plebs; Guardian hacks get half a dozen earnest opinion pieces out of it; trebles all round!  Then rinse and repeat in a week or two.

[Al Bundy]

18 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I see the sun have apologised for Clarkson's comments they decided to allow.

The apology is as meaningless and mealy mouthed as Clarkson's earlier so called apology.

Both the sun and Clarkson have proven just how out of touch with basic humanity and public sentiment they are, and are now backpedaling to save face.

They're pathetic. 

Would that be the newspaper that sells more than any other?

 

I bet they are soooo glad they are out of touch.

 

🙄

Edited December 24, 2022 by Al Bundy

[Mister M]

5 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

Would that be the newspaper that sells more than any other?

 

I bet they are soooo glad they are out of touch.

 

🙄

That's right it's the biggest selling rag in the UK.

Which doesn't reflect well on their readership in my opinion.

And yes, they were out of touch with regards to the fact they decided to publish Clarkson's hideous article.

They may be the country's biggest selling newspaper, but they don't represent the views of the country. Thank God.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Mister M

[ab6262]

clarkson was spot on with those comments and many many people agree!

[Guest sibon]

1 minute ago, ab6262 said:

clarkson was spot on with those comments and many many people agree!

🎣