Harry and Megan

[PaulP]

I don't know her mind at all, I don't claim to.

But her actions and words are on public display for all to see and hear, the two do not correlate!

For example, claiming media invasion of privacy, demanding distance and respect, then firing opening salvos of a private family debate via a lucrative Oprah Winfrey interview. Not really self-consistent, perhaps even outright contradictory!

I'm sure you're smart enough to understand the difference between a public and private life. Simply because someone gives an interview or launches a new series it doesn't mean they want someone parked outside their house 24/7, rifling through their trash or trying to get a photo of that person taking a dump. Surely you can see the difference ?

[Gointocarlton]

I don't know her mind at all, I don't claim to.

But her actions and words are on public display for all to see and hear, the two do not correlate!

For example, claiming media invasion of privacy, demanding distance and respect, then firing opening salvos of a private family debate via a lucrative Oprah Winfrey interview. Not really self-consistent, perhaps even outright contradictory!

So if I understand correctly:
1. If you're famous, you have to cop the hate in the neck and HTFU.
2. If you're famous, you can't go public about your anguish and one most simply HTFU and keep quiet.

[PaulP]

Just as an aside Paul. Have you seen Game of Thrones? Do you get the 'Shame' reference?

I have not seen it, but the reference in question is quite well known even outside of GoT fans. Its become a popular meme and even used on AFL players and coaches. Its part of pop-culture.

I feel a lot of the negativity is people not understanding the reference/missing the joke.
Thats why my first post talked about context.

Right. So if I claim to hate someone's mother / daughter etc., not in the same way that I hate Rose West, but on a cellular level, implying that the husband of this woman is pussy whipped, and that I twitch as I lie awake at night and dream of the day when this woman will be paraded through the streets, laughed at, ridiculed, spat at, carrying the cross to which she will be nailed, then crucified in a very visible and public place to send a clear message, then left to slowly and painfully die, then left on the cross for her body to decompose and be eaten by vultures, then finally tossed into a common grave, I guess I can also claim that I'm just making a zany joke, and not only that, I've added some intellectual rigour because I've presented a standard scholarly understanding of the last days and death of Jesus. And way more people should understand this reference than GOT, so I guess I'm really off the hook.

I think I understand context now.

[Lods]

He's not off the hook.
It was an idiot comment to make.
He was trying to make a 'witty tweet' and ended up looking like a 'nasty twit.'

Even most of us who immediately got the GOT reference would have thought it was a stupid comment..one that went way too far.
Do I really think he wanted to see that happen to her...of course I don't.
Yet someone who didn't understand the reference could easily feel that is exactly what he intended.

This topic is producing a fair bit of emotion, but as usually happens with these things once you've picked a side you tend to go a bit deaf to alternative thoughts.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Im with LP on this issue, Ms Markle knew the Royal playbook when she took on the role, your life will be non stop scrutiny like Di, like Kate etc. English Prince marries American actress.. did they really think they were going to live some anonymous lifestyle out of the public gaze and raise children, chickens and sheep together in some tranquil village in England without the media wanting to know their every move?
Numpties like Clarkson are part of the environment, TV celebs full of their own importance gobbing off on everyone and everything to stay relevant...its part of the job and you have to deal with it and use it to your advantage.
You win over the haters and play the long game, you dont run off to the USA and try and make a quick buck every way you can by selling your soul to the highest bidders.
They have had some real bad advice imho, they should have stayed, played the long game as I said and tried to change things slowly as they built their popularity and became more important to the image of the Royal Family.
Time to build a bridge with good King Charlie and maybe they can go on Top Gear or what ever Clarkson is hosting these days and win some haters over too.
Charlie and Camilla had to repent their wicked affair and sins when they got married and look at them now, everyone loves a repentant Royal giving a good prayer of Penitence...

[Lods]

Charlie and Camilla had to repent their wicked affair and sins when they got married and look at them now, everyone loves a repentant Royal giving a good prayer of Penitence...

Unless your name is Andrew, then you're buggered

[PaulP]

Lods, you call it an idiotic comment. I think it's much worse than that. And there are no get out of jail free cards. There's a line that's been crossed, and it's not good enough to say she knew what she was getting into. Someone who has done no wrong doesn't deserve that treatment.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Unless your name is Andrew, then you're buggered

He will do a couple of years in Royal Purgatory then be allowed out to attend Royal functions if he behaves himself.
My guess is all this Megan/Harry stuff has worked in his favour and allowed him to slip under the media radar a bit and he is probably hoping it continues that way for a while.

[Lods]

Lods, you call it an idiotic comment. I think it's much worse than that. And there are no get out of jail free cards. There's a line that's been crossed, and it's not good enough to say she knew what she was getting into. Someone who has done no wrong doesn't deserve that treatment.

I don't know what greater negative tag I can put on it than 'idiotic'.
If he actually meant that he'd like to see her treated in that way then 'psychopathic' may have been appropriate.

He was being a smart-arse but if you use 'pop culture' to make a point, no matter how silly, you will always find a group of folks who will find it more offensive because they don't understand the reference you're making.

[kruddler]

Right. So if I claim to hate someone's mother / daughter etc., not in the same way that I hate Rose West, but on a cellular level, implying that the husband of this woman is pussy whipped, and that I twitch as I lie awake at night and dream of the day when this woman will be paraded through the streets, laughed at, ridiculed, spat at, carrying the cross to which she will be nailed, then crucified in a very visible and public place to send a clear message, then left to slowly and painfully die, then left on the cross for her body to decompose and be eaten by vultures, then finally tossed into a common grave, I guess I can also claim that I'm just making a zany joke, and not only that, I've added some intellectual rigour because I've presented a standard scholarly understanding of the last days and death of Jesus. And way more people should understand this reference than GOT, so I guess I'm really off the hook.

I think I understand context now.

I'm not saying its justified or whatever, just that there is humour in it that people are largely missing.
Not everyone has the same kind of humour and when you reach as many people as he does, these kind of comments are ALWAYS going to piss someone off, sometimes, most people.

Not sure if you've ever watched Eddie Murphy - Raw (or Delirious) filmed in the 80's. At the time, it was about the funniest thing going around, cutting edge and very much pushing boundaries (and potentially overstepping a few times).
Now, go back and watch that now and it is very cringey in a lot of places. You can't tell the same gay jokes that were acceptable then. Society has changed. Eddie Murphy has transformed into Mr Disney with all his kid friendly movies now. He has evolved.
I'm sure he still has that rude side, but he doesn't let it out in public.

Clarkson is only 1 year older than Eddie Murphy and grown up with similar humour. He has not evolved....or at least hasn't learned to hide his inner voice.

Personally, i am very thick skinned and there is not much you can say to me (if anything) that will make me 'lose it'. I know i'm in the minority these days and everyone is delicate flowers and want the right to have babies, even if they don't have a womb (No thats not a gay joke - rather a movie reference) but our societies right to get offended has very much taken over our logic, reasoning and humour.
So when something like this gets as much air time as it does, i can't help but push back at the cancel culture peeps and try and bring a bit of perspective back.

Again, i'm not saying he should've said it. Just that the reaction is not warranted.